Problem 173 & 174

A place to air possible concerns or difficulties in understanding ProjectEuler problems. This forum is not meant to publish solutions. This forum is NOT meant to discuss solution methods or giving hints how a problem can be solved.
Forum rules
As your posts will be visible to the general public you are requested to be thoughtful in not posting anything that might explicitly give away how to solve a particular problem.

This forum is NOT meant to discuss solution methods for a problem.

In particular don't post any code fragments or results.

Don't start begging others to give partial answers to problems

Don't ask for hints how to solve a problem

Don't start a new topic for a problem if there already exists one


See also the topics:
Don't post any spoilers
Comments, questions and clarifications about PE problems.
User avatar
sjhillier
Administrator
Posts: 561
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: Birmingham, UK
Contact:

Re: Problem 173

Post by sjhillier »

jdorje wrote:Problem 173 seems pretty ambiguous. What does "not necessarily using all of the tiles at one time" mean? This is the opposite of the "unique" tiling given in the example? Why make the example show one thing then make the problem something, not just more complicated (that's normal), but with no precise definition?
I think I found the meaning clear when I attempted this problem, but you aren't the first to have a little trouble with the wording. I think you'll probably find the answer to this in the earlier thread which, if I get it right, starts with this post.
User avatar
rayfil
Administrator
Posts: 1412
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:30 am
Location: Quebec, Canada
Contact:

Re: Problem 173 & 174

Post by rayfil »

The example simply shows you two different ways (not ONE unique way) which would produce a square lamina as defined, using 32 square tiles. Those two would be part of the 41 different hollow laminea you could produce when you use any quantity of square tiles up to 100 in Problem 173.
When you assume something, you risk being wrong half the time.
Post Reply