Your criticism is valid. I'd been lazy previously because of lack of auto-indent. The line with fail =. fail , y - numPoss should be fail =. fail , y - numPoss + # game, but I'm not using fail yet.
On 3 March 2011 15:45, Devon McCormick <[email protected]> wrote: > As as side note, am I the only one who would find the code easier to read if > it had some minimal formatting, as shown below, which includes basic > indentation, avoidance of low-information density lines like a bare "do.", > and a comment or two? I don't mean to single out Justin for criticism as > much of the example code also avoids this basic, helpful formatting. > > alg=: 3 : 0 > > NB.* alg: Create full tree of card deck possibilities to test hi-lo > strategy. > > fail=. 0$0 [ tree=. stack=. ,: 0 [ vals=. ,: _1 > > > > while. 0 < # stack do. > > topStack=. {. stack > > stack=. }. stack > > game=. vals {~ topStack toRoot tree > > p=. y poss game > > numPoss=. # p > > > > if. numPoss > 0 do. > > vals=. vals , p > > stack=. stack ,~ (# tree) + i. numPoss > > tree=. tree , numPoss $ topStack > > fail=. fail , y - numPoss > > else. fail=. fail , 0 end. > > end. > > > > tree;vals > > NB.EG (0 0 0 1 2;_1 0 1 1 0) -: alg 2 > > ) > > I also incorporated my own convention of a leading comment with an > explanation of what is intended and a trailing comment with an example > (showing the expected result, if feasible). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
