Nonograms!
 

Hey.

Hey Espy.

Hey.

http://xmpps.greenmaw.com/~coda/stuf...am-preview.png

EDIT: ... oops, I missed some squares. XD

You can't just do that and not post a link.

I mean, if you really want it...

file:///Users/coda/nonogram/nonogram.html

But it's not going to work... ;)

EDIT: All right, I'm done enough to actually post something.

http://greenmaw.com/webgames/nonogram/

Ooooh. -grabby hands-

(that's a lie; I've already gone and finished a board)

How difficult is it to code a nonogram seeding program so that the user has enough information from the given numbers to actually complete it?

(also I reverted back to my old plug-into-MS-paint habit because I've been spoiled by a certain mobile app and can't do nonograms without a function to indicate when a square is definitely not blue.)

I'm working on an X marker, but you were giving grabby hands so I put up a "good enough" WIP.

Try 15x15 seed 765212668 btw. I just solved it, but it was a pretty good challenge.

A way to evaluate seeds like that sounds pretty challenging. It's an INTERESTING challenge, to be sure. It ties into the idea of a hint generator I had. But I can't make any guarantees that it's even mathematically tractable.

EDIT: It should be noted that they're always solvable. I assume you actually mean that the solution is UNIQUE.

Hm, I ran into some similar issues w Sudoku a couple days ago, so I suppose what I'm wondering about is a unique solution that doesn't require a guess.

...Actually hmm, does one follow from another...?

If you can solve it without a guess, it follows that the solution is unique. The converse does not hold; a unique solution may still require guessing.

I have no desire to ensure that a puzzle can be solved without guessing. I've solved plenty of puzzles that require guessing. They're harder, to be sure, but I consider that a feature. (It WOULD be nice to heuristically guess at a puzzle's difficulty, though.)

Only once have I managed to get into a state where all of the runs are satisfied but I didn't have the accepted solution. It's possible that other puzzles I've solved in the past could have had similar faux solutions; it's not something I've paid attention to.

EDIT: Ack! Now it's twice, and this time I can't figure out what the other solution is... Okay, this might be more important than I thought. 15x15 seed 842082313.

EDIT 2: Never mind, it was a bug in the board validation. The solution on this one is unique.

Okay, now there's support for putting X in squares. You can use the toggle in the corner, or you can hold shift when clicking.

EDIT: Solved a 20x20 (seed 742247382), so I feel pretty good about the game being pretty stable.

Ooh picross

I've got a couple apps on my phone
And a couple others I've removed cuz I finished them
And a LoZ themed one on my 3ds

@.@ 20x20 seed 234666122 was unexpectedly difficult, but I solved it.

EDIT: Okay, now that I'm pretty sure I've got the kinks worked out, I can get started on some analysis tools.

EDIT 2: Bleh! Okay, that one had at least two ambiguous places in the solution. Maybe I do need some ambiguity avoidance... (Note to self: 15x15 seed 52070975)

Oh wow. Huh.

This analyzer that I'm working on isn't all that smart. It implements exactly the same technique I use when I start a puzzle -- it fills in all of the squares that have to be filled in no matter how you organize the hints for that row/column, then it fills in all of the squares where the edge hints make it unambiguous how far inward you have to go, then it puts in X's at the endpoints of fully-satisfied hints, then it puts in X's on the edges if the hint can't reach it given the rest of the information.

And yet even as simple as it is, I thought I had found a bug in it. It X'ed a few squares that had me scratching my head -- why would it mark THOSE?

A few minutes of debugging later... Oh. That's NOT a bug. That's completely right, and I wouldn't have noticed.

oooh another site to spend the night...
thanks Coda xD

You're welcome. I should put this in my "Games by Coda" thread once I polish it up a bit more. (I want to make the touchscreen controls less awkward.)

Whoops I misread that as, you have the touch controls working, and got super excited.

I mean it probably KIND OF works on a touchscreen. I haven't tried it but it's probably not exactly user-friendly.

Nah, I’m using safari (iPhone... i should really dl ff or somethinng) and I can select a square, but not actually alter it.