Re: [eclipse-clp-users] Bugs in http://87.230.22.228/examples/crew.ecl.txt?

From: C A <slaphead99_at_...32...>
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 23:54:03 +0000
> > 
> > I ran it with this data overnight (it took 5 hours):
> > 
> > 
> > flights(
> > [flight( 1,crew:6,stewards:3,stewardesses:3,french:1,spanish:1,german:1),
> > flight( 2,crew:6,stewards:3,stewardesses:3,french:1,spanish:1,german:1),
> > flight( 3,crew:6,stewards:3,stewardesses:3,french:1,spanish:1,german:1),
> > flight( 4,crew:7,stewards:3,stewardesses:3,french:1,spanish:1,german:1),
> > flight( 5,crew:7,stewards:3,stewardesses:3,french:1,spanish:1,german:1),
> > flight( 6,crew:7,stewards:3,stewardesses:3,french:1,spanish:1,german:1)
> > 
> > ]
> > ).
> > 
> > And no solution respected the two_days_off clauses.
> > 
> > If the problem is my understanding- can someone explain briefly how this constraint can be decided as optional?
> > 
> 
> Can you show the incorrect solutions? I tried running your data with the 
> crew example, and it has not yet produced a solution after nearly a day...
> 


I'll try to get round to running this again, sure, but the answer I got was simply the same crew repeatedly scheduled (per solution)- which is what I meant by no solution respected the two_days_off clause. The poor devils didn't even get one day off.

 

As I said, mine took 5 hours, but I'm using a pretty new, quad core machine so I don't know if that expalins the difference we are seeing in run-to-completion-time.

 

Chris.

 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
Received on Sun Feb 07 2010 - 23:54:09 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jul 09 2018 - 02:05:29 CEST