Version: 0.4.0 (using 4.2.2 (KDE 4.2.2), Kubuntu packages) Compiler: cc OS: Linux (i686) release 2.6.28-12-generic I have been informed that I had an improper solution (several times) when my solution fulfilled all of the information obtained through the 'laser' shooting interface. That is to say that your software's solution was correct but non-unique. I found another equally accuurate solution but it was considered to be "wrong". Please observe the attached screen shot./home/thomas/Desktop/Screenshot-KBlackBox.png
Created attachment 33535 [details] Screen shot of described bug. You will note that mine is a valid solution.
I am a member, albeit a new one. I had to become one to post. BTW just in case it matters, I am using Ubuntu Jaunty in terms of platform. Likely not significant in that which I am reporting. thanks
Created attachment 33601 [details] You will note (I hope) that my solution is a correct one.
Here is another example of a correct solution that KBlackbox deems incorrect. Perhaps this could be called a wish rather than a bug, but I think the software should be robust enough to check whether the solution fits the data (the laser beam results) rather than simply whether the player puts the orbs in the same locations as the program initially placed them. (I flunked human mind reading, never got to the machine level) Then there are no worries about uniqueness of solution. Also this, for the programer, is much simpler than assuring uniqueness. Should just need to add a few lines of code.
This is a know issue or wish of KBlackBox. There is already a bug related to that: 161042. In fact, this is very complicated to solve. I don't see a nice way to do that. (The only idea I have is to write a kind of script to compute a list of predefined game scenarii. The script would randomly generate game scenarii, test all cases and keep only game scenarii with unique solutions...) If you have any suggestion for an algorithm to identify unique solutions for KBlackBox, I'll be glad to implement it. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 161042 ***