|
<br />
for (int c = 0; c < _myHand.CardCount; c++)<br />
{<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(1))<br />
e[1] = e[1] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(2))<br />
e[2] = e[2] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(3))<br />
e[3] = e[3] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(4))<br />
e[4] = e[4] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(5))<br />
e[5] = e[5] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(6))<br />
e[6] = e[6] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(7))<br />
e[7] = e[7] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(8))<br />
e[8] = e[8] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(9))<br />
e[9] = e[9] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(10))<br />
e[10] = e[10] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(12))<br />
e[12] = e[12] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(13))<br />
e[13] = e[13] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (_myHand.Cards[c].Equals(14))<br />
e[14] = d[14] + 1;<br />
<br />
}<br />
This is just great  And this thing doesn't appear at one place, but all over the code!
Mostly, when you see programmers, they aren't doing anything. One of the attractive things about programmers is that you cannot tell whether or not they are working simply by looking at them. Very often they're sitting there seemingly drinking coffee and gossiping, or just staring into space. What the programmer is trying to do is get a handle on all the individual and unrelated ideas that are scampering around in his head. (Charles M Strauss)
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, my eyes, my eyes!
Why 14? What's in e[0]? Is that d[14] a typo?
|
|
|
|
|
I wish to know that 
Mostly, when you see programmers, they aren't doing anything. One of the attractive things about programmers is that you cannot tell whether or not they are working simply by looking at them. Very often they're sitting there seemingly drinking coffee and gossiping, or just staring into space. What the programmer is trying to do is get a handle on all the individual and unrelated ideas that are scampering around in his head. (Charles M Strauss)
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: What's in e[0]?
e[0]? Whats e[0]?
Indices are starting from one, ever since VB existed!
If you are really oldscool, you may even substitute VB with Fortran...
Failure is not an option - it's built right in.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, that is absolutely horrible. I've seen some bad programmers in high school, and this type of code would fit right in there.
What a shame 
|
|
|
|
|
But in school the teacher would (should) point the offender in the right direction.
One of the benefits that schools have over books.
|
|
|
|
|
Ah, but we DID have an excellent high school teacher. He is still one of my favorite teachers/professors of all time. He was always doing his best to solve people's programming "mistakes" and send them in the right direction.
We also had a set of TAs that would help the class learn and code, and they were really helpful. Alas, all the "good" programmers also became TAs by sheer force and there was little you could do to avoid being asked for help five times per class *laughs*
In the end, however, some people are beyond hopeless for becoming programmers and should quit while they're not too far behind. I see bad examples of programmers even in college as a Junior (now almost a Senior). I'm amazed how some people made it this far! 
|
|
|
|
|
hah
the horrible poker code I saw in HS didn't use arrays or parameter passing. everything was stored in global variables.
I probably had as much to do with cluebatting my classmate out of that nonsense as did the teacher. :->
--
You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square00);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square01);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square02);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square03);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square04);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square10);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square11);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square12);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square13);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square14);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square20);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square21);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square22);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square23);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square24);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square30);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square31);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square32);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square33);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square34);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square40);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square41);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square42);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square43);
if (Convert.ToBoolean(random.Next(2))) ToggleSquare(square44);
I didn't post a link to the article to protect the innocent(?)
Regards,
mav
--
Black holes are the places where God divided by 0...
|
|
|
|
|
WTF!  What else can I say? 
I expect from your statement that the amount of code, over all, could be cut in half. I wonder what other coding gaffs where made.
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."Edsger Dijkstra
|
|
|
|
|
Same beauty but with the strings
<br />
for (int c = 0; c < b.Length; c++)<br />
{<br />
if (b[c].Equals("1"))<br />
d[1] = d[1] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("2"))<br />
d[2] = d[2] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("3"))<br />
d[3] = d[3] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("4"))<br />
d[4] = d[4] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("5"))<br />
d[5] = d[5] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("6"))<br />
d[6] = d[6] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("7"))<br />
d[7] = d[7] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("8"))<br />
d[8] = d[8] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("9"))<br />
d[9] = d[9] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("10"))<br />
d[10] = d[10] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("12"))<br />
d[12] = d[12] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("13"))<br />
d[13] = d[13] + 1;<br />
else<br />
if (b[c].Equals("14"))<br />
d[14] = d[14] + 1;<br />
<br />
}<br />
and the "d" is:
int[] d = new int[15];
As you can see he use indices from 1 to 14 so he hat to set size of array to 15 instead of 14.
Mostly, when you see programmers, they aren't doing anything. One of the attractive things about programmers is that you cannot tell whether or not they are working simply by looking at them. Very often they're sitting there seemingly drinking coffee and gossiping, or just staring into space. What the programmer is trying to do is get a handle on all the individual and unrelated ideas that are scampering around in his head. (Charles M Strauss)
|
|
|
|
|
Man! If I had the code and the time (which I do not) I would revamp code all over the place. Unrolling loops is an old optimization trick, but you need to know when to do it and when not to. I am not even sure unrolling is even needed today, because the machines today are so fast they make my first computer look like it was standing still.
The new I understand, I never do it, but people sometimes do it to make it easier to match values with indexes.
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence."Edsger Dijkstra
|
|
|
|
|
This stuff is stunning, not even a line of comment !
Kochise
In Code we trust !
|
|
|
|
|
Oh man, I didn't even notice the absence of 11!
|
|
|
|
|
Cards 1 and 11 are the same, so 11 is skipped, at least something is right 
Mostly, when you see programmers, they aren't doing anything. One of the attractive things about programmers is that you cannot tell whether or not they are working simply by looking at them. Very often they're sitting there seemingly drinking coffee and gossiping, or just staring into space. What the programmer is trying to do is get a handle on all the individual and unrelated ideas that are scampering around in his head. (Charles M Strauss)
|
|
|
|
|
So the underlying design is flawed as well?
|
|
|
|
|
Could be depending on the rules of the game. Normally ace is the highest and lowest card, if for some reason an ace could be a 1, or between 10 and jack the implementation would sorta make sense.
--
You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
dan neely wrote: would sorta make sense.
...but not much, there's probably a cleaner way.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: dan neely wrote:
would sorta make sense.
...but not much, there's probably a cleaner way.
the sorta was representing that fact. I didn't immediately see a better way, but assumed a less ugly construct still should exist.
--
You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
|
|
|
|
|
LMFAO...that's funny. Thanks for the laugh. I'm such a geek..laughing about code.
|
|
|
|
|
whats so difficult about:
for (int c = 0; c < _myHand.CardCount; c++)<br />
{<br />
e[_myHand.Cards[c]]++;<br />
}
This might not work, depending on how the value of the cards are stored, though, in which case just cast to int
---
The sum of the intelligence of the world is constant. The total number of people is always increasing.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh My God, Please visit this Great Horror
Regards,
Sylvester G
sylvester_g_m@yahoo.com
|
|
|
|
|
I am unable to understand the gc concept of the mc++, as per the example for managed pointers in mc++ using gc there is no any proper explanation, i am putting the code, if someone is able to explain it, i will be thankful to you.
__gc struct G
{
int i;
};
__value struct V
{
int i;
};
int main()
{
// defaults to V __gc * __nogc * ppV;
V ** ppV;
// defaults to V __gc * __nogc * __nogc * pppV;
V *** pppV;
// defaults to G __gc * __gc * ppG;
G ** ppG;
// defaults to G __gc * __gc * __nogc * pppG;
G *** pppG;
// defaults to G __gc * __gc * __nogc * __nogc * ppppG;
G **** ppppG;
}
my question is : why there are only two _gc's for the garbage collected why not all are garbage collected, or what is the advantage of _gc pointer coming for one time and coming for two times, can anyone explain me?
-- modified at 5:15 Tuesday 15th May, 2007
Thanks,
Syed
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have an answer for you, but to keep it on-topic, this confusing overloading of the meaning of * was a major flaw in MC++, and it's been fixed in C++/CLI by denoting GC handles with ^ instead.
|
|
|
|
|
Method name (only) changed. It shouldn't even have been public in the first place. Even if you disregard the blatant coding guidelines violations, I think this is a shame.
public string getFormattedDate(string date)
{
string concat ="";
if (null != date)
{
int i;
String dateTimeChar = new String(date.ToCharArray());
for(i=0;i<(date.Length-4);i++)
{
concat = concat+ dateTimeChar[i];
}
concat = concat+ ",";
for(i=4;i<(date.Length-2);i++)
{
concat = concat+ dateTimeChar[i];
}
concat = concat+ ",";
for(i=6;i<(date.Length);i++)
{
concat = concat+ dateTimeChar[i];
}
DateTime dt = DateTime.Parse(concat);
concat = dt.ToString("yyyy-MM-dd");
}
return concat;
}
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
