Finding out players gender and name in text based adventure game

Question

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#define NL "\n"

int main(void) {

    //Acquires players first name 
    std::string introOne = "Welcome to The World of Magick\nWhat is your name?\n";
    std::cout << introOne;

    std::string playerName;
    std::cin >> playerName;

    //Asks for players gender 
    while(true) { 
    std::cout << "Are you a boy or a girl?" << NL << "1. Boy | 2. Girl" 
    << NL << "Choices are selected by typing in a single number" << NL;

    int playerGenderSelect;
    std::string playerGender;
    std::cin >> playerGenderSelect;


        //Sets gender depending on value entered
        switch(playerGenderSelect) { 

        case 1:
        playerGender = "male";
        break;

        case 2:
        playerGender = "female";
        break;

        default: 
        std::cout << "Not a valid number, try again" << NL;



    }

    //If the player entered a valid number, break loop, if not, continue it.
    if(playerGender == "male" or playerGender == "female") {
        break;
    }
    else { 
        continue;
    }
} 




    return 0;
} 

I wrote this code for a text based adventure game I'm making too keep me busy over the weekend.

I usually do this kind of boredom-project in python but decided to tackle it in C++. I was wondering if there were any obvious taboos or things that could obviously be optimized better.

Answer 1

I see a number of things that may help you improve your code.

Use objects

The code has two things that look like a menu. It also collects two pieces of data about a single player. Those things, menu and player could and probably should be objects. Perhaps you're a beginning programmer, and haven't learned about objects yet, but this kind of repeated task with associated data is really well-suited to object-oriented programming and that's something that C++ is very good at expressing. For an example of a usable menu object, see this answer.

Prefer const variables to #define

Instead of using the old C-style #define as in this line:

#define NL "\n"

It's generally better and more type-safe to use a const variable like this:

static const std::string NL{"\n"};

However, I'd probably not define this particular one in either case and simply type \n where it's needed.

Use constant string concatenation

The code currently contains this:

std::cout << "Are you a boy or a girl?" << NL << "1. Boy | 2. Girl" 
<< NL << "Choices are selected by typing in a single number" << NL;

But you don't really need to do it that way which potentially calls the << operator six times. Instead, you could express the same thing as this:

std::cout << "Are you a boy or a girl?\n" 
    "1. Boy | 2. Girl\n" 
    "Choices are selected by typing in a single number\n";

Which is both more readable and only calls << once. The compiler automatically concatenates the string literals together.

Use consistent formatting

The code as posted has inconsistent indentation which makes it hard to read and understand. Pick a style and apply it consistently.

Sanitize user input better

The code doesn't quite work as posted. If I enter a string such as "Edward" to answer a question, the program stays in an endless loop. It would be better to read a (text) line in and then convert it to a number. Users can do funny things and you want your program to be robust.

Omit return 0

When a C or C++ program reaches the end of main the compiler will automatically generate code to return 0, so there is no need to put return 0; explicitly at the end of main.

Note: when I make this suggestion, it's almost invariably followed by one of two kinds of comments: "I didn't know that." or "That's bad advice!" My rationale is that it's safe and useful to rely on compiler behavior explicitly supported by the standard. For C, since C99; see ISO/IEC 9899:1999 section 5.1.2.2.3:

[...] a return from the initial call to the main function is equivalent to calling the exit function with the value returned by the main function as its argument; reaching the } that terminates the main function returns a value of 0.

For C++, since the first standard in 1998; see ISO/IEC 14882:1998 section 3.6.1:

If control reaches the end of main without encountering a return statement, the effect is that of executing return 0;

All versions of both standards since then (C99 and C++98) have maintained the same idea. We rely on automatically generated member functions in C++, and few people write explicit return; statements at the end of a void function. Reasons against omitting seem to boil down to "it looks weird". If, like me, you're curious about the rationale for the change to the C standard read this question. Also note that in the early 1990s this was considered "sloppy practice" because it was undefined behavior (although widely supported) at the time.

So I advocate omitting it; others disagree (often vehemently!) In any case, if you encounter code that omits it, you'll know that it's explicitly supported by the standard and you'll know what it means.