[BUG] Interplay contradiction rule and modifying board

[Bram28]

Description

If you use a contradiction rule, you should of course not be able to modify the board at thew same time. But currently LEGUP allows this ... leading to mistakes.

Steps to Reproduce

OK, let's start with a blank board, and immediately try a contradiction rule:

LEGUP correctly indicates that my use of the contradiction rule is incorrect. So far so good.

Now let's go back to the transition, and add two lightbulbs to the board:

Oops! This should of course not happen. The fundamental mistake is of course that I was able to make changes to the board in the first place during the transition that points to a contradiction rule. If a contradiction rule is used, I should not also be able to make a change to the board.

By the way, what if we first make changes to the board (which of course I should be able to do, and then select a contradiction rule? Then it looks like this:

Well, at least the rule does not check out ... but I still have two lightbulbs being placed on the board as part of a transition that points to a contradiction rule. Note that when I go back to the starting board state, and then go back to the transition, it looks like this:

OK, so the lightbulbs are no longer considered part of the transition ... but it's too late: we should never have allowed to have changes to the board and a contradiction rule as part of the same transition!

Expected Behavior

Here is what I propose: when the user makes a change to the board, then the user will simply not be able to select a contradiction rule ... a warning should appear to that effect. And when a transition already points to a contradiction rule, the user should not be able to make any changes to the board as part of that transition (again, maybe a warning will appear as soon as the user tries to make a change to the board as part of a contradiction rule transition)

Screenshots

No response

Puzzle Files

No response

Additional Context

No response

[charlestian23]

@Chase-Grajeda This issue gets closed with #649, right?

[Chase-Grajeda]

Yup, #649 's changes also fixed this bug. Closing