RuleEngineers Alpha 0.2.0

[pifricted]

Could we have "unnecessary transition" which can be covered by others?

e.g.

Code: Select all

@TABLE
n_states:2
neighborhood:Moore
symmetries:permute
var a = {0,1}
var a1 = a
var a2 = a
var a3 = a
var a4 = a
var a5 = a
var a6 = a
var a7 = a
var a8 = a

0,1,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,1
a,1,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,1
a,a1,a2,a3,a4,a5,a6,a7,a8,0

In this ruletable, a cell with a transition like this wouldn't become state 0, because it has been defined to be state 1.

Code: Select all

1 1 0
0 c 0 --> 1
0 0 0

(We could make something like cyclic rule through this.)

[R2INT]

Here's how the ruletable you provided would look in the Constraint Editor:

Screenshot 2026-10-02 131414.png (41.48 KiB) Viewed 92 times

By default, RuleEngineers defines the variable 'a' to mean all the states.

To make a Constraint Editor tab, right-click the '+' icon to show a drop-down that will show "New Constraint Tab". Click on that to create a Constraint Tab. If you want to create a new variable, click the "Make Variable" option and select which states to use.

[hotcrystal0]

1) I’ve kept RuleEngineers closed-source for now mainly to keep development simple while it’s still in early alpha. Maintaining an open-source project adds overhead, and I want to focus on building out the core functionality first. I may revisit this later.

There is one more reason I wish it was open-source: If it were open-source, I’m pretty sure someone would have made a Mac and a Linux build, amongst other things.