[Gecode] Space consumption of set variables

[Christian Schulte]

Hi Gabor,

Long time no hear!

While I tend to agree in spirit with Gabor, the good news is that getting
things back on stage is soooooo easy these days ;-) The interfaces have
become so simple, that's just a breazer (how do you spell that damn word?).
My decision for simplifiying the integer variables went along that way.

Cheers
Christian

-----Original Message-----
From: gecode-bounces at gecode.org [mailto:gecode-bounces at gecode.org] On Behalf
Of Gabor Szokoli
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 11:33 PM
To: Technical discussions about Gecode
Subject: Re: [Gecode] Space consumption of set variables


Guido Tack wrote:

>My conclusion
>is that additional propagation conditions are expensive, and should only be

>used if a lot of propagators can really make use of the stronger
information. 
>This does not seem to be the case with cardinality PCs for set constraints.
>  
>
Hi all,

I know nothing is too expensive for the guy who just watches, and that 
this implies a horrible nightmare of a build process, with exponential 
number of scenarios to test and maintain, but I just have to say it: Maybe
these kind of alternative implementations could be factorised into 
build options of the library, so double-plus-expert users could tweak 
them to fit their problem domains?
It just seems like such a waste to permanently drop a setup which might 
benefit some (agreed, probably not many) propagators.


Gabor Szokoli

_______________________________________________
Gecode mailing list
Gecode at gecode.org http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/mailman/listinfo/gecode