On Jan 1, 2006, at 4:37 PM, Phil Tomson wrote:

> I kept thinking that a recursive solution would be the easiest way  
> to go, but
> I quickly found that even some of the most trival testcases  
> overwhelmed the
> stack :-(  (not too surprising, I guess, given the size of the  
> search space).

This seems odd to me.  Wouldn't a recursive breadth-first (or even  
iterative depth-first) only ever recurse as deep as there are numbers  
in the solution?  Everything we've seen so far should be well within  
solvable that way, unless I'm missing something obvious here...

James Edward Gray II