Re: One for the programmers or maths/logic geeks

Don, I've read this through several times, coming back to it and
trying again, but you're losing me each time.  Questions appear
in-line:

Don K wrote:

>I'm just kibitzing here but how about something like this :
>(read while waving hands wildly)
>
>Start by choosing a cell near the middle.

Do you have to start near the middle, or does that just make it
quicker?

>Map the size of the largest contiguous square in each quadrant
>around that cell. Call these first-order squares.

What size squares?  are you talking about squares that go right to the
boundaries, or just adjacent cells, or 2x2, or ...?

>Notice that in each quadrant, the first-order square area applies
>to every interior cell.

And this is where I really get baffled - sorry ...

>Next step would be to map 2nd-order squares on adjacent boundaries,
>then 3rd-order, etc. and look for biggest rectangles. Maybe it would
>be efficient to do a binary-split

.... which is why by now I've no idea what you have in mind.

>Enough hand-waving already!
>I'm leaving it up to you to work out the details!

Ach, I'll do the details!  I just need to understand your method
first, it sounds intriguing.
-- 
John Hatpin