StachuK1992
statue
My thought is this:
Eventually, I will let you input with ()[], etc.
However, I will strip all of these out in the database.
On the front end, though, users will have the option (as a per-user setting) to automatically view algs with paren() around common move groups
So you'd input an alg like:
(F R U' R' U' R U R' F') (R U R' U' R' F R F')
This would be stripped to be in the database as:
F R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F'
If a certain option were selected, you would see the alg like this:
F R U' R' U' (R U R') F' (R U R' U' R') F R F'
or something similar.
Unfortunately, things like (M' U)3 don't seem feasible, at least for the near future.
I appreciate the response!
OH-specific algs will be addressed specifically; I'm still deciding upon the best method for this.
At first, the following will be the way to deal with finding OH algs:
I will have a move group filter. For instance, I will go to an OLL case and tell the system to look for algs with only R, U, and r moves.
Eventually, I will let you input with ()[], etc.
However, I will strip all of these out in the database.
On the front end, though, users will have the option (as a per-user setting) to automatically view algs with paren() around common move groups
So you'd input an alg like:
(F R U' R' U' R U R' F') (R U R' U' R' F R F')
This would be stripped to be in the database as:
F R U' R' U' R U R' F' R U R' U' R' F R F'
If a certain option were selected, you would see the alg like this:
F R U' R' U' (R U R') F' (R U R' U' R') F R F'
or something similar.
Unfortunately, things like (M' U)3 don't seem feasible, at least for the near future.
I appreciate the response!
OH-specific algs will be addressed specifically; I'm still deciding upon the best method for this.
At first, the following will be the way to deal with finding OH algs:
I will have a move group filter. For instance, I will go to an OLL case and tell the system to look for algs with only R, U, and r moves.
