Subject:
|
Re: rtlToronto15 January issues
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:20:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1364 times
|
| |
|
|
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 05:16:47PM +0000, Jeff Van Winden wrote:
> So Calum you are suggesting that the shortest path would be the marked
> path, but if a robot goofs up, and turns the wrong way, it can
> continue, and take a longer, route that will still lead it to the
> critical path.
Wouldn't it be useful, since you could avoid the other robot, and not
have to bash your way through it?
> Sleepy and at work... Two things that NEVER seem to work together...
> Unless you get paid to sleep :)
Mmmmmm, sleep. "I too will go home, for sleep" :)
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: rtlToronto15 January issues
|
| (...) That's the other benefit of having secondary paths-not reducing the game to sumo. A single decision up front to go onto an alternate path allows a competitor to avoid a sumo like game. Calum (23 years ago, 25-Aug-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: rtlToronto15 January issues
|
| (...) So Calum you are suggesting that the shortest path would be the marked path, but if a robot goofs up, and turns the wrong way, it can continue, and take a longer, route that will still lead it to the critical path. Calum, are you being (...) (23 years ago, 25-Aug-03, to lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto)
|
30 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
