Leon-de-Owlet / magiccube4d

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/magiccube4d
0 stars 0 forks source link

Twist confusion on large puzzles like the 7^4 #18

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Non-central 2C sticker doesn't twist as I'd expect (twists like a 3C sticker 
instead of a 2C).

Original issue reported on code.google.com by roi...@gmail.com on 19 Sep 2009 at 5:46

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I'm not sure if this was fixed at some point along the way (the fact that we 
check the 
face when looking up grips now might have helped), or was just never a problem.

Seems ok now though, so closing.

Original comment by roi...@gmail.com on 15 Oct 2009 at 7:11

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Actually, the behavior is still here and easy to see on larger puzzles, e.g. 
the 4^6, 
but is perhaps ok.  Since the closest grip to a sticker is used, when the 
puzzles get 
large, some 2C stickers may do twists normally associated with 3C or 4C 
stickers.

Even though this feels a little confusing, it still seems reasonable (and 
probably 
preferable).

Original comment by roi...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2009 at 3:27

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
Reopening this issue after Melinda brought it up.

Once the user is aware of what the program is doing, things feel pretty 
easy/natural, but it is going to throw people for a loop (as it already did for 
her 
and me).

If we wanted to, it would be easy to make the following change...  Only search 
grips 
of a given dimension for certain cubie types.  So for stickers part of a 4C 
cubie, 
we'd search only 0D vertex grips.  For stickers part of a 3C cubie, we'd search 
only 
1D grips, etc.  To be honest, I don't think I've thought through all the 
ramifactions of making a general change like this, but it seems to be what we 
might 
want.

I could even see people taking both sides on this one (potentially yet another 
'make 
an option' type situation).

Original comment by roi...@gmail.com on 9 Nov 2009 at 11:23

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
I like your new suggestion and I'd be happy to turn it into preference if you 
decide
to support both mappings.

Original comment by cutelyaw...@gmail.com on 9 Nov 2009 at 11:48

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago
This issue was closed by revision r156.

Original comment by roi...@gmail.com on 11 Nov 2009 at 3:51