[gecode-users] flatzinc 1.2.1 question

[Alejandro Arbelaez]

Hi,

Firstly, thanks for the quick reply. I'll have a look to the array indexing.

I agree that the best is to update to the last version, and I do understand
that it is difficult to support old versions. But sometimes it is
complicated to update to new gecode versions, I was doing that from
gecode-2.0.0 to gecode-2.1.1, but my experiments take around 2 weeks (not to
mention the time needed to update my code) and now that the reflection
module is no longer supported, things are even harder for me.



Thanks, I think gecode is a great constraint library.

Alejandro





and now updating is even harder in my case because th

my experiments take 1 or 2 weeks, and i cannot re-run everything for each
new


On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Christian Schulte <cschulte at kth.se> wrote:

> Then, it's really better to always check out the last versions, we can't
> really offer support for very old versions (2.1.1 is 15 months old).
>
> Christian
>
> --
> Christian Schulte, www.ict.kth.se/~cschulte/<http://www.ict.kth.se/%7Ecschulte/>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: users-bounces at gecode.org [mailto:users-bounces at gecode.org] On Behalf
> Of Mikael Zayenz Lagerkvist
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 1:54 PM
> To: Alejandro Arbelaez
> Cc: users at gecode.org
> Subject: Re: [gecode-users] flatzinc 1.2.1 question
>
> Hi,
>
> While I'm not certain how the particular problem you are solving looks
> like, there have been several changes to FlatZinc since then. In
> particular, the default for arrays is now to start indexing from one
> instead of from zero, which obviously makes a lot of models incorrect.
>
> The file CHANGES in the Gecode/FlatZinc distribution contains a list
> of the changes for each version.
>
> Cheers,
> Mikael
>
>
> 2009/6/3 Alejandro Arbelaez <alejandro.arbelaez at gmail.com>:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I'm trying to use flatzinc-1.2.1 (and gecode-2.1.1) to solve the carseq
> > problem-instances from the minizinc repository. Working with this
> > flatzinc/gecode version I quickly get solutions that contains all zeros,
> > which I think is not correct. On the other hand, i just tried the same
> > instances using the last version of gecode/flazinc and after 10 minutes I
> > couldn't get a solution (but this is normal since these instances are
> quite
> > difficult, i think I will need a lot of time to get a solution)..
> >
> > Do you know if there is any bug in Gecode/Flatzinc-1.2.1 (or Minizinc
> > specification) to have this strange solutions.
> >
> >
> > Maybe the easiest solution would be to move to gecode-3*, but it is a bit
> > difficult for me to move to the last gecode version.
> >
> >
> >
> > Many thanks
> > Alejandro
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gecode users mailing list
> > users at gecode.org
> > https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Mikael Zayenz Lagerkvist, http://www.ict.kth.se/~zayenz/<http://www.ict.kth.se/%7Ezayenz/>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gecode users mailing list
> users at gecode.org
> https://www.gecode.org/mailman/listinfo/gecode-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/pipermail/users/attachments/20090603/25ac15ab/attachment.htm>