Nope, that doesn't do it, because using Torf ,fort, or Tor 4 produces a solution. My doubt is whether a digit can be inserted where there could be a word, but not one that produces a solution.
I haven't rigorously examined the sample solutions for lack of one that would establish the point, nor do I really care to.
| [reply] |
My doubt is whether a digit can be inserted where there could be a word, but not one that produces a solution.
Well. I think it is perfectly clear. You cannot use a digit at any point where a word is available. (*)
(*) I was about to add 'regardless of whether a solution can be achieved', but it is unnecessary. If there is a word available, you cannot ignore that word and use a digit. For any reason, including achieving a solution that would otherwise be complient.
For the record, without that rule, there would be many more solutions that are presented in the official results.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
| [reply] |
| [reply] |
BrowserUk,
I also read the rules incorrectly because of the following example:
04824: 0 Torf
04824: 0 fort
04824: 0 Tor 4
The last solution is what lead me astray. If it had read:
As you work left to right, if at any point a word can be inserted - using a digit is illegal and at no point can two digits be adjacent
I would have understood much better. In any event, my solution is buggy and produces incorrect results. Since it seems like you were after approaches, I believe mine is interesting because of the unrestricted integer partitions. I have no interest at this point in making it a correct solution.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
| [reply] |