Re: Eclipse bug?

Hi Chris,

You are indeed correct, C=-1 is indeed a valid value in the domain and should
not have been pruned. This is a bug in the fd solver.

We have been developing the ic library to supercede fd, using it gives the
correct answer:

[eclipse 1]: lib(ic).

[eclipse 2]: A::[0..1],B::[0..1],C::[-1..1], A#=B*C.
 
A = A{[0, 1]}
B = B{[0, 1]}
C = C{-1 .. 1}
 
 
Delayed goals:
        ic : (A{[0, 1]} =:= B{[0, 1]} * C{-1 .. 1})
        ic : (B{[0, 1]} =:= A{[0, 1]} / C{-1 .. 1})
        ic : (C{-1 .. 1} =:= A{[0, 1]} / B{[0, 1]})
        sync_ic_vars(A{[0, 1]}, A)
Yes (0.00s cpu)

Our development priority is on ic, so I'm afraid this bug will probably be
low priority.

Can you use ic instead of fd for your investigation?

Regards

Andy

On Tue, Jan 14, 2003 at 05:28:28PM +0000, Christopher Jefferson wrote:
> Apologize for sending another e-mail so soon, but I believe I have found a 
> bug in eclipse 5.3 but cannot believe that it is a bug.
> 
> [eclipse 1]: use_module(library(fd)).
> ......
> Yes (0.50s cpu)
> [eclipse 2]: A::[0..1],B::[0..1],C::[-1..1], A#=B*C.
> 
> A = A{[0, 1]}
> B = B{[0, 1]}
> C = C{[0, 1]}
> 
> 
> Delayed goals:
>         B{[0, 1]} * C{[0, 1]} #= A{[0, 1]}
> Yes (0.00s cpu)
> 
> 
> I do not understand why it prunes the domain of C, as clearly A=0, B=0, 
> C=-1 is a valid setting for the variables?
> 
> Chris
> 
>