This site uses different types of cookies, including analytics and functional cookies (its own and from other sites). To change your cookie settings or find out more, click here. If you continue browsing our website, you accept these cookies.
We've recently made an accessibility improvement to the community and therefore posts without any content are no longer allowed. Please use the spoiler feature or add a short message in the message body in order to submit your weekly challenge.
Cool problem to solve. I only used one spatial tool in the whole thing (1 x Spatial Match) and I got 40 words.
A couple of them are repeats though which makes sense using Alabama instead of Louisiana and New Mexico instead of Minnesota. The repeats are Condemns, Makimono, Matronal, Monecian. If the technique used was the other way around to look at the words then see if that word could be made, then those duplicates may not have been found.
My iterative macro first finds all pairwise touching states on the first pass, and subsequently drops the shapes and keeps finding the subsequent connected states using the pairwise combinations. Keeping the shapes really blows up the workflow and grinds it to a halt. I also gave the macro user the option of increasing the number of connected states, for the hypothetical situation where you had a list of 10 letter words, or 12, etc.