On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Joel Goldstick <joel.goldst...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris, and all.. Since you posted yours, I post this for your pleasure. I > couldn't figure out what you were doing. > [chomp Python implementation of a fairly elegant solution]
That's a fairly nice piece of code that comes from a deliberate solution. What the OP asked was how to devise a brute-force solver. Grab the four class definitions from my code a few posts ago, and then tweak your code to use them: a = Schrodinger(1) b = Schrodinger(2) c = Schrodinger(4) all_ones = a & b & c two_or_three = (a & b) | (a & c) | (b & c) zero_or_one = ~two_or_three one_one = zero_or_one & (a | b | c) zero_or_two = ~(all_ones | one_one) zero_ones = zero_or_one & zero_or_two two_ones = zero_or_two & two_or_three # the output is true if all the inputs are zero, | if one of the inputs is zero & it is either b | c # | two inputs are zero & they are b & c # ditto f| other two inputs x = zero_ones | (one_one & (b | c)) | (two_ones & (b & c)) y = zero_ones | (one_one & (a | c)) | (two_ones & (a & c)) z = zero_ones | (one_one & (b | a)) | (two_ones & (b & a)) if x == ~a: print(x) if y == ~b: print(y) if z == ~c: print(z) Output: (I tweaked my __repr__ functions to parenthesize for clarity) (((not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and not ((($1 and $2) and $4) or (not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4)))) or ((not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4)) and ($2 or $4))) or ((not ((($1 and $2) and $4) or (not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4))) and ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4))) and ($2 and $4))) (((not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and not ((($1 and $2) and $4) or (not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4)))) or ((not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4)) and ($1 or $4))) or ((not ((($1 and $2) and $4) or (not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4))) and ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4))) and ($1 and $4))) (((not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and not ((($1 and $2) and $4) or (not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4)))) or ((not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4)) and ($2 or $1))) or ((not ((($1 and $2) and $4) or (not ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4)) and (($1 or $2) or $4))) and ((($1 and $2) or ($1 and $4)) or ($2 and $4))) and ($2 and $1))) Okay, so maybe the brute-force-discovered version isn't so bad after all. :) The classes allow "a and b == c" to be evaluated for all possible values of a, b, and c, so the brute-forcing actually accumulates data and only subsequently evaluates it. It's far from the most efficient solution (took hours on an i5 CPU), but it's fun :) ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list