I have now no time to code but this is what I would do. My usual approach is to do gradually build it up recursively with backtracking. I would think that you would not see many of the 16! possible combinations in such a procedure. If one would use a string as the underlying data structure, then a regex should be possible to identify the bad patterns. My first thought was m/(....).*\1/ but that would not detect overlapping repetitions. But I am sure such a regex exists.
In reply to Re: (OT) A different kind of 'combinatorics'
by hdb
in thread (OT) A different kind of 'combinatorics'
by BrowserUk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |