Timeline for Guess My Number - computer guesses the user's number
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:33 | comment | added | RPiAwesomeness | @thepace I see what you mean. Definitely something I should have thought of. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:30 | comment | added | thepace | @Dan Allen: Agreed. Can't help that. Seems autocratic and unprecedented :( | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:29 | comment | added | thepace | @RPiAwesomeness: In the initial level it would be fine. But as you narrow down the range, it would take time. Consider, max= 10; min = 7; toGuess=9. Just have the random while loop generate a number for such narrow range and check the latency. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:24 | comment | added | RPiAwesomeness | @thepace I highly doubt any modern CPU will have any trouble with that, other than a few milliseconds now or then. However, I can see what you're saying and it makes sense. Cleaner code is definitely something I'm going for! :) | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:23 | comment | added | RPiAwesomeness | @SimonAndréForsberg That makes sense. It's a more compact way of getting an answer within the max & min bounds. Thanks for the suggestion! | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:23 | comment | added | thepace | @RPiAwesomeness: Point4: It will evade the while loop which could take a while before it produces a number in the required range. So, the game would be more realtime/ fast interaction with the user. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:20 | comment | added | user59064 |
I think it's harsh too. The routine {} blocking of if is very a widely adopted practice but not a universal requirement. To me the no-no is placing the conditioned statement on the same line as the condition making it hard to put a break-point on the triggered condition in an interactive debugger and I wouldn't vote that down either. IMHO down vote should be used for answers that are actually invalid rather than stylistically wanting or sound but capable of improvement.
|
|
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:20 | comment | added | Simon Forsberg | @RPiAwesomeness Although it doesn't affect performance, it affects clean code. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:19 | comment | added | Simon Forsberg | @RPiAwesomeness Computers don't derp, programmers do. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:19 | comment | added | Simon Forsberg |
As is said in the question, the computer-guesses-human twist is "version 2". Also, it is much less likely that status == CORRECT so it does actually makes sense having that condition last.
|
|
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:18 | comment | added | RPiAwesomeness | @thepace First point: I had considered that, if I ever get bored I may go back and add that. Point 2: Because I was messing with Binary. Point 3: Error catching because computers derp some times! Looking at it now, I realize I probably don't need that, but it's never called, so it's not really affecting performance...right? Point 4: Is that something that'll improve performance? Point 5: :) | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:01 | history | edited | thepace | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 60 characters in body
|
| Dec 15, 2014 at 18:00 | comment | added | thepace | That's harsh. It was more of a informal code. Will udpate it. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 17:59 | comment | added | njzk2 |
-1 for suggesting the use of if blocks without {}
|
|
| Dec 15, 2014 at 17:57 | comment | added | Jamal | I guess the output is the computer attempting to speak to the human player or vice-versa. Perhaps a nice little touch, but still noisy. | |
| Dec 15, 2014 at 17:54 | history | answered | thepace | CC BY-SA 3.0 |