--- "aacockburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> open := roll1 + roll2 < 10.
> >> spare := (roll1 < 10) and: (roll1 + roll2 = 10).
> >> strike := roll1 = 10.
> --- JeffGrigg wrote:
> << Have you considered reversing the order and using not?
> I think that reversing the order and using 'not' would
> make it (at least more) clear that only one could be
> set, and always one will be set.) >>
--- "aacockburn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have no trouble reversing the order to:
> strike := roll1 = 10.
> spare := (roll1 < 10) and: (roll1 + roll2 = 10).
> open := roll1 + roll2 < 10.
> but it should be clear somehow that they are mutually
> exclusive --- two of them can't possibly be set.
Now I just have to figure out how to refactor my posts, so that they
will be more clear! ;->
What I had in mind was to reverse the order /and then use each
boolean in the following expressions./ Like this:
strike := roll1 = 10.
spare := (strike not) and: (roll1 + roll2 = 10).
open := (strike not) and: (spare not).
I get here by saying, "roll1 < 10" means "not a strike." The
expression for "open" is more complex now, but I think it does make
it more clear that everything not a strike or spare is an "open."
To Post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extremeprogramming/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
