I want to make coding about the final score display. If someone has done 10 multiple choice questions and he clicks on the final score button, then his final score will appear along with the description. The score will be made in a range according to the category, namely 1-59 = Under Average, 60-79 = Average, and 80-100 = Above Average.
I've tried coding it but I found error 1176 on line 7 and 11.
Can you help me fix it?
finalscorebutton.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, finalscore);
function finalscore(event:MouseEvent):void
{
multiplechoicefinalscore.text = sumofscores;
var finalscore:String = finalscore.toString;
finalscore = multiplechoicefinalscore..text;
if(finalscore.toString < 60){
description.text =
"UNDER AVERAGE.";
}
else if(finalscore.toString >= 60 && finalscore.toString <=79){
description.text =
"AVERAGE.";
}
else{
description.text =
"ABOVE AVERAGE.";
}
}
There are multiple syntax and logic errors.
Something.toString is a reference to a method, you probably mean Something.toString() which calls the said method and returns a text representation of whatever Something is.
You don't need a text representation because you want to compare numbers, you need a numeric representation (which is either int, uint or Number).
There are 2 dots in multiplechoicefinalscore..text, what does it even mean?
There is function finalscore and then you define var finalscore, defining things with the same names is a bad idea in general.
You should keep your script formatted properly, otherwise reading it and understanding would be a pain.
So, I assume you have the user's result is in sumofscores. I'm not sure if the script below will actually work as is, but at least it is logically and syntactically correct:
finalscorebutton.addEventListener(MouseEvent.CLICK, onFinal);
function onFinal(e:MouseEvent):void
{
// Ok, let's keep this one, I think you are putting
// the score result into some kind of TextField.
multiplechoicefinalscore.text = sumofscores;
// Get a definitely numeric representation of the score.
var aScore:int = int(sumofscores);
// In terms of logic, putting the complicated condition case
// under the "else" statement will simplify the program.
if (aScore < 60)
{
description.text = "UNDER AVERAGE.";
}
else if (aScore > 79)
{
description.text = "ABOVE AVERAGE.";
}
else
{
description.text = "AVERAGE.";
}
}
Please help with a metaprogramming configuration such that I can add collections methods called collectWithIndex and injectWithIndex that work in a similar manner to eachWithIndex but of course include the base functionality of collect and inject. The new methods would accept a two (three with maps) argument closure just like eachWithIndex. I would like to have the capability to utilize these methods across many different scripts.
Use case:
List one = [1, 2, 3]
List two = [10, 20, 30]
assert [10, 40, 90] == one.collectWithIndex { value, index ->
value * two [index]
}
Once the method is developed then how would it be made available to scripts? I suspect that a jar file would be created with special extension information and then added to the classpath.
Many thanks in advance
I'm still sure, it's not a proper SO question, but I'll give you an example, how you can enrich metaclass for your multiple scripts.
Idea is based on basescript, adding required method to List's metaClass in it's constructor. You have to implement collect logic yourself, through it's pretty easy. You can use wrapping
import org.codehaus.groovy.control.CompilerConfiguration
class WithIndexInjector extends Script {
WithIndexInjector() {
println("Adding collectWithIndex to List")
List.metaClass.collectWithIndex {
int i = 0
def result = []
for (o in delegate) // delegate is a ref holding initial list.
result << it(o, i++) // it is closure given to method
result
}
}
#Override Object run() {
return null
}
}
def configuration = new CompilerConfiguration()
configuration.scriptBaseClass = WithIndexInjector.name
new GroovyShell(configuration).evaluate('''
println(['a', 'b'].collectWithIndex { it, id -> "[$id]:$it" })
''')
// will print [[0]:a, [1]:b]
If you like to do it in more functional way, without repeating collect logic, you may use wrapping proxy closure. I expect it to be slower, but maybe it's not a deal. Just replace collectWithIndex with following implementation.
List.metaClass.collectWithIndex {
def wrappingProxyClosure = { Closure collectClosure, int startIndex = 0 ->
int i = startIndex
return {
collectClosure(it, i++) // here we keep hold on outer collectClosure and i, and use call former with one extra argument. "it" is list element, provided by default collect method.
}
}
delegate.collect(wrappingProxyClosure(it))
}
offtopic: In SO community your current question will only attract minuses, not answers.
I need a thread safe data structure with three operations: remove, getRandom, reset.
I have only two ideas by now.
First: Seq in syncronized var.
val all: Array[String] = ... //all possible.
var current: Array[String] = Array.empty[String]
def getRandom(): = {
val currentAvailable = current
currentAvailable(Random.nextInt(currentAvailable.length))
}
def remove(s: String) = {
this.syncronized {
current = current diff Seq(s)
}
}
def reset(s: String) = {
this.syncronized {
current = all
}
}
Second:
Maintain some Map[String,Boolean], there bool is true when element currently is present. The main problem is to make a fast getRandom method (not something like O(n) in worst case).
Is there a better way(s) to implement this?
Scala's Trie is a lock free data structure that supports snapshots (aka your currentAvailable) and fast removals
Since I'm not a Scala expert so this answer is general as an example I used Java coding.
in short the answer is YES.
if you use a map such as :
Map<Integer,String> map=new HashMap<Integer,String>(); //is used to get random in constant time
Map<String,Integer> map1=new HashMap<String,Integer>(); //is used to remove in constant time
to store date,
the main idea is to keep the key( in this case the integer) synchronized to be {1 ... size of map}
for example to fill this structure, you need something like this:
int counter=0; //this is a global variable
for(/* all your string (s) in all */ ){
map.put(counter++, s);
}
//then , if you want the removal to be in constant time you need to fill the second map
for(Entry e : map.EntrySet(){
map1.put(e.getValue(),e.getKey());
}
The above code is the initialization. everytime you want to set things you need to do that
then you can achieve a random value with O(1) complexity
String getRandom(){
int i; /*random number between 0 to counter*/
return map.get(i);
}
Now to remove things you use map1 to achive it in constant time O(1);
void remove(String s){
if(!map1.containsKey(s))
return; //s doesn't exists
String val=map.get(counter); //value of the last
map.remove(counter) //removing the last element
int thisCounter= map1.get(s); //pointer to this
map1.remove(s); // remove from map1
map.remove(counter); //remove from map
map1.put(thisCounter,val); //the val of the last element with the current pointer
counter--; //reducing the counter by one
}
obviously the main issue here is to keep the synchronization ensured. but by carefully analyzing the code you should be able to do that.
Trying to implement my first Parallel::For loop with a tread local variable to sum results of the loop. My code is based on an example listed in "Visual C++ 2010, by W. Saumweber, D. Louis (German). Ch. 33, P.804).
I get stuck in the implementation with syntax errors in the Parallel::For call. The errors are as follows, from left to right: a) expected a type specifier, b) too many arguments for generic class "System::Func", c) pointer to member is not valid for a managed class, d) no operator "&" matches these operands.
In line with the book, I create a collection with data List<DataStructure^> numbers, which is subject to a calculation performed in method computeSumScore which is called by the Parallel::For routine in method sumScore. All results are summed in method finalizeSumScore using a lock.
Below I paste the full code of the .cpp part of the class, to show what I have. The data collection "numbers" may look a bit messy, but that's due to organical growth of the program and me learning as I go along.
// constructor
DataCollection::DataCollection(Form1^ f1) // takes parameter of type Form1 to give acces to variables on Form1
{
this->f1 = f1;
}
// initialize data set for parallel processing
void DataCollection::initNumbers(int cIdx)
{
DataStructure^ number;
numbers = gcnew List<DataStructure^>();
for (int i = 0; i < f1->myGenome->nGenes; i++)
{
number = gcnew DataStructure();
number->concentrationTF = f1->myOrgan->cellPtr[cIdx]->concTFA[i];
number->stringA->AddRange(f1->myGenome->cStruct[i]->gString->GetRange(0, f1->myGenome->cChars));
number->stringB->AddRange(f1->myGenome->cStruct[i]->pString);
if (f1->myGenome->cStruct[i]->inhibitFunc)
number->sign = -1;
else
number->sign = 1;
numbers->Add(number);
}
}
// parallel-for summation of scores
double DataCollection::sumScore()
{
Parallel::For<double>(0, numbers->Count, gcnew Func<double>(this, &GenomeV2::DataCollection::initSumScore),
gcnew Func<int, ParallelLoopState^, double, double>(this, &GenomeV2::DataCollection::computeSumScore),
gcnew Action<double>(this, &GenomeV2::DataCollection::finalizeSumScore));
return summation;
}
// returns start value
double DataCollection::initSumScore()
{
return 0.0;
}
// perform sequence alignment calculation
double DataCollection::computeSumScore(int k, ParallelLoopState^ status, double tempVal)
{
int nwScore;
if (numbers[k]->concentrationTF > 0)
{
nwScore = NeedlemanWunsch::computeGlobalSequenceAlignment(numbers[k]->stringA, numbers[k]->stringB);
tempVal = Mapping::getLinIntMapValue(nwScore); // mapped value (0-1)
tempVal = (double) numbers[k]->sign * tempVal * numbers[k]->concentrationTF;
}
else
tempVal = 0.0;
return tempVal;
}
// locked addition
void DataCollection::finalizeSumScore(double tempVal)
{
Object^ myLock = gcnew Object();
try
{
Monitor::Enter(myLock);
summation += tempVal;
}
finally
{
Monitor::Exit(myLock);
}
}
Once this problem is solved I need to ensure that the functions called (computeGlobalSequenceAlignment and getLinIntMapvalue) are thread safe and the program doesn't get stalled on multiple treads accessing the same (static) variables. But this needs to work first.
Hope you can help me out.
Hans Passant answered my question in the comments (include full method name, add comma). Yet I cannot mark my question as answered, so this answer is to close the question.
Does C# 4.0 allow optional out or ref arguments?
No.
A workaround is to overload with another method that doesn't have out / ref parameters, and which just calls your current method.
public bool SomeMethod(out string input)
{
...
}
// new overload
public bool SomeMethod()
{
string temp;
return SomeMethod(out temp);
}
If you have C# 7.0, you can simplify:
// new overload
public bool SomeMethod()
{
return SomeMethod(out _); // declare out as an inline discard variable
}
(Thanks #Oskar / #Reiner for pointing this out.)
As already mentioned, this is simply not allowed and I think it makes a very good sense.
However, to add some more details, here is a quote from the C# 4.0 Specification, section 21.1:
Formal parameters of constructors, methods, indexers and delegate types can be declared optional:
fixed-parameter:
attributesopt parameter-modifieropt type identifier default-argumentopt
default-argument:
= expression
A fixed-parameter with a default-argument is an optional parameter, whereas a fixed-parameter without a default-argument is a required parameter.
A required parameter cannot appear after an optional parameter in a formal-parameter-list.
A ref or out parameter cannot have a default-argument.
No, but another great alternative is having the method use a generic template class for optional parameters as follows:
public class OptionalOut<Type>
{
public Type Result { get; set; }
}
Then you can use it as follows:
public string foo(string value, OptionalOut<int> outResult = null)
{
// .. do something
if (outResult != null) {
outResult.Result = 100;
}
return value;
}
public void bar ()
{
string str = "bar";
string result;
OptionalOut<int> optional = new OptionalOut<int> ();
// example: call without the optional out parameter
result = foo (str);
Console.WriteLine ("Output was {0} with no optional value used", result);
// example: call it with optional parameter
result = foo (str, optional);
Console.WriteLine ("Output was {0} with optional value of {1}", result, optional.Result);
// example: call it with named optional parameter
foo (str, outResult: optional);
Console.WriteLine ("Output was {0} with optional value of {1}", result, optional.Result);
}
There actually is a way to do this that is allowed by C#. This gets back to C++, and rather violates the nice Object-Oriented structure of C#.
USE THIS METHOD WITH CAUTION!
Here's the way you declare and write your function with an optional parameter:
unsafe public void OptionalOutParameter(int* pOutParam = null)
{
int lInteger = 5;
// If the parameter is NULL, the caller doesn't care about this value.
if (pOutParam != null)
{
// If it isn't null, the caller has provided the address of an integer.
*pOutParam = lInteger; // Dereference the pointer and assign the return value.
}
}
Then call the function like this:
unsafe { OptionalOutParameter(); } // does nothing
int MyInteger = 0;
unsafe { OptionalOutParameter(&MyInteger); } // pass in the address of MyInteger.
In order to get this to compile, you will need to enable unsafe code in the project options. This is a really hacky solution that usually shouldn't be used, but if you for some strange, arcane, mysterious, management-inspired decision, REALLY need an optional out parameter in C#, then this will allow you to do just that.
ICYMI: Included on the new features for C# 7.0 enumerated here, "discards" is now allowed as out parameters in the form of a _, to let you ignore out parameters you don’t care about:
p.GetCoordinates(out var x, out _); // I only care about x
P.S. if you're also confused with the part "out var x", read the new feature about "Out Variables" on the link as well.
No, but you can use a delegate (e.g. Action) as an alternative.
Inspired in part by Robin R's answer when facing a situation where I thought I wanted an optional out parameter, I instead used an Action delegate. I've borrowed his example code to modify for use of Action<int> in order to show the differences and similarities:
public string foo(string value, Action<int> outResult = null)
{
// .. do something
outResult?.Invoke(100);
return value;
}
public void bar ()
{
string str = "bar";
string result;
int optional = 0;
// example: call without the optional out parameter
result = foo (str);
Console.WriteLine ("Output was {0} with no optional value used", result);
// example: call it with optional parameter
result = foo (str, x => optional = x);
Console.WriteLine ("Output was {0} with optional value of {1}", result, optional);
// example: call it with named optional parameter
foo (str, outResult: x => optional = x);
Console.WriteLine ("Output was {0} with optional value of {1}", result, optional);
}
This has the advantage that the optional variable appears in the source as a normal int (the compiler wraps it in a closure class, rather than us wrapping it explicitly in a user-defined class).
The variable needs explicit initialisation because the compiler cannot assume that the Action will be called before the function call exits.
It's not suitable for all use cases, but worked well for my real use case (a function that provides data for a unit test, and where a new unit test needed access to some internal state not present in the return value).
Use an overloaded method without the out parameter to call the one with the out parameter for C# 6.0 and lower. I'm not sure why a C# 7.0 for .NET Core is even the correct answer for this thread when it was specifically asked if C# 4.0 can have an optional out parameter. The answer is NO!
For simple types you can do this using unsafe code, though it's not idiomatic nor recommended. Like so:
// unsafe since remainder can point anywhere
// and we can do arbitrary pointer manipulation
public unsafe int Divide( int x, int y, int* remainder = null ) {
if( null != remainder ) *remainder = x % y;
return x / y;
}
That said, there's no theoretical reason C# couldn't eventually allow something like the above with safe code, such as this below:
// safe because remainder must point to a valid int or to nothing
// and we cannot do arbitrary pointer manipulation
public int Divide( int x, int y, out? int remainder = null ) {
if( null != remainder ) *remainder = x % y;
return x / y;
}
Things could get interesting though:
// remainder is an optional output parameter
// (to a nullable reference type)
public int Divide( int x, int y, out? object? remainder = null ) {
if( null != remainder ) *remainder = 0 != y ? x % y : null;
return x / y;
}
The direct question has been answered in other well-upvoted answers, but sometimes it pays to consider other approaches based on what you're trying to achieve.
If you're wanting an optional parameter to allow the caller to possibly request extra data from your method on which to base some decision, an alternative design is to move that decision logic into your method and allow the caller to optionally pass a value for that decision criteria in. For example, here is a method which determines the compass point of a vector, in which we might want to pass back the magnitude of the vector so that the caller can potentially decide if some minimum threshold should be reached before the compass-point judgement is far enough away from the origin and therefore unequivocally valid:
public enum Quadrant {
North,
East,
South,
West
}
// INVALID CODE WITH MADE-UP USAGE PATTERN OF "OPTIONAL" OUT PARAMETER
public Quadrant GetJoystickQuadrant([optional] out magnitude)
{
Vector2 pos = GetJoystickPositionXY();
float azimuth = Mathf.Atan2(pos.y, pos.x) * 180.0f / Mathf.PI;
Quadrant q;
if (azimuth > -45.0f && azimuth <= 45.0f) q = Quadrant.East;
else if (azimuth > 45.0f && azimuth <= 135.0f) q = Quadrant.North;
else if (azimuth > -135.0f && azimuth <= -45.0f) q = Quadrant.South;
else q = Quadrant.West;
if ([optonal.isPresent(magnitude)]) magnitude = pos.Length();
return q;
}
In this case we could move that "minimum magnitude" logic into the method and end-up with a much cleaner implementation, especially because calculating the magnitude involves a square-root so is computationally inefficient if all we want to do is a comparison of magnitudes, since we can do that with squared values:
public enum Quadrant {
None, // Too close to origin to judge.
North,
East,
South,
West
}
public Quadrant GetJoystickQuadrant(float minimumMagnitude = 0.33f)
{
Vector2 pos = GetJoystickPosition();
if (minimumMagnitude > 0.0f && pos.LengthSquared() < minimumMagnitude * minimumMagnitude)
{
return Quadrant.None;
}
float azimuth = Mathf.Atan2(pos.y, pos.x) * 180.0f / Mathf.PI;
if (azimuth > -45.0f && azimuth <= 45.0f) return Quadrant.East;
else if (azimuth > 45.0f && azimuth <= 135.0f) return Quadrant.North;
else if (azimuth > -135.0f && azimuth <= -45.0f) return Quadrant.South;
return Quadrant.West;
}
Of course, that might not always be viable. Since other answers mention C# 7.0, if instead what you're really doing is returning two values and allowing the caller to optionally ignore one, idiomatic C# would be to return a tuple of the two values, and use C# 7.0's Tuples with positional initializers and the _ "discard" parameter:
public (Quadrant, float) GetJoystickQuadrantAndMagnitude()
{
Vector2 pos = GetJoystickPositionXY();
float azimuth = Mathf.Atan2(pos.y, pos.x) * 180.0f / Mathf.PI;
Quadrant q;
if (azimuth > -45.0f && azimuth <= 45.0f) q = Quadrant.East;
else if (azimuth > 45.0f && azimuth <= 135.0f) q = Quadrant.North;
else if (azimuth > -135.0f && azimuth <= -45.0f) q = Quadrant.South;
else q = Quadrant.West;
return (q, pos.Length());
}
(Quadrant q, _) = GetJoystickQuadrantAndMagnitude();
if (q == Quadrant.South)
{
// Do something.
}
What about like this?
public bool OptionalOutParamMethod([Optional] ref string pOutParam)
{
return true;
}
You still have to pass a value to the parameter from C# but it is an optional ref param.
void foo(ref int? n)
{
return null;
}