I have been working with Labware LIMS attempting to get my do loop to work. What am I doing wrong and how can I fix it?
X = 1
Do (SQR (x) < 5 While
X = X + 1
Msgbox(X)
loop
It is considered a do-while loop. I am assuming your issue is the 2nd line as it should be Do While. Supplied below is what I mean.
X = 1
Do While (SQR (X) < 5
X = X + 1
Msgbox(X)
loop
Brad you lost the closing bracket.
X = 1
Do While (SQR (X) < 5)
X = X + 1
Msgbox(X)
loop
Related
puts "enter a number"
x = gets.chomp.to_i
y = 0
while x != 1
y += 1
if x % 2 == 0
x = x / 2
else
x = x*3 + 1
end
print "#{x} "
end
puts "\nThe number of sequence is #{y+1}"
Hi, if I key in negative number or 0, I will get an infinite loop. How do I avoid entering the loop if my number is 0 or negative.
You can use x > 1 i.e
puts "enter a number"
x = gets.chomp.to_i
# if you want to consider negative as positive then x = gets.chomp.to_i.abs
y = 0
while (x > 1)
y += 1
if x % 2 == 0
x = x / 2
else
x = x*3 + 1
end
print "#{x} "
end
puts "\nThe number of sequence is #{y+1}"
Hope it helps
To answer your question:
Your code works perfectly well and does exactly what it is told to do:
while x is not 1 OR x is smaller than 0 do this codeblock.
If you set x to a negative number, x will never be a positive number, so it runs forever (because x is always smaller 0).
So, the code is correct, but there is a flaw in the logic behind it :)
Factorial 1 and 2 works but 3 and 4 do not. I've worked the steps out on paper and do not see why they do not work. Any help is much appreciated.
def factorial(n)
x = 1
y = n
while x < n
n = n * (y-x)
x = x + 1
end
return n
end
puts("factorial(1) == 1: #{factorial(1) == 1}")
puts("factorial(2) == 2: #{factorial(2) == 2}")
puts("factorial(3) == 6: #{factorial(3) == 6}")
puts("factorial(4) == 24: #{factorial(4) == 24}")
The reason it's not working is that after each loop the value of n gets bigger and the condition x < n keeps executing until it hits a point where n becomes zero. If you pass 3 to the function on the third loop you will have:
while x(3) < n(6)
n(6) = n(6) * (y(3) - x(3))
end
therefore n becomes 0 causing the loop to exit on the next round and the return value is obviously 0. To fix it you just need to replace n with y in the while condition:
while x < y
As a side note just another interesting way you could solve the factorial problem using recursion is:
def factorial(n)
n <= 1 ? 1 : n * factorial(n - 1)
end
Try this:
def factorial(n)
if n < 0
return nil
end
x = 1
while n > 0
x = x * n
n -= 1
end
return x
end
I'm new to programming and I'm trying to program something but there's some kind of syntax error which I can't work out. Any help would be much appreciated. Here's my code:
begin
puts"Enter a number to count, or to exit type 0."
y = gets.chomp.to_i
if y == 0
exit
end
puts"Now put the number you're starting with"
x = gets.chomp.to_i
if y + x == 12 or y + x < 12
print x + y
end
if y + x > 12
n = y + x - 12
end
begin
if n < 12 or n == 12
print n
end
if n > 12
n = n - 12
end
end until if n < 12 or n == 12
end until y == 0
end
Your use of until if if wrong. They are each control sequences. You shouldn't need both.
Your n is not visible later in the code. Declare n=0 for example before if y + x > 12 to make it visible and accessible in the relevant code blocks.
Then, until if is wrong, this should simply be until
Lastly, delete the last end keyword.
When I use an imperative language I often write code like
foo (x) {
if (x < 0) return True;
y = getForX(x);
if (y < 0) return True;
return x < y;
}
That is, I check conditions off one by one, breaking out of the block as soon
as possible.
I like this because it keeps the code "flat" and obeys the principle of "end
weight". I consider it to be more readable.
But in Haskell I would have written that as
foo x = do
if x < 0
then return x
else do
y <- getForX x
if y < 0
then return True
else return $ x < y
Which I don't like as much. I could use a monad that allows breaking out, but
since I'm already using a monad I'd have to lift everything, which adds words
I'd like to avoid if I can.
I suppose there's not really a perfect solution to this but does anyone have
any advice?
For your specific question: How about dangling do notation and the usage of logic?
foo x = do
if x < 0 then return x else do
y <- getForX x
return $ y < 0 || x < y
Edit
Combined with what hammar said, you can even get more beautiful code:
foo x | x < 0 = return x
| otherwise = do y <- getForX x
return $ y < 0 || x < y
Using patterns and guards can help a lot:
foo x | x < 0 = return x
foo x = do
y <- getForX x
if y < 0
then return True
else return $ x < y
You can also introduce small helper functions in a where clause. That tends to help readability as well.
foo x | x < 0 = return x
foo x = do
y <- getForX x
return $ bar y
where
bar y | y < 0 = True
| otherwise = x < y
(Or if the code really is as simple as this example, use logic as FUZxxl suggested).
The best way to do this is using guards, but then you need to have the y value first in order to use it in the guard. That needs to be gotten from getForX wich might be tucked away into some monad that you cannot get the value out from except through getForX (for example the IO monad) and then you have to lift the pure function that uses guards into that monad. One way of doing this is by using liftM.
foo x = liftM go (getForX x)
where
go y | x < 0 = True
| y < 0 = True
| otherwise = x < y
Isn't it just
foo x = x < y || y < 0 where y = getForX x
EDIT: As Owen pointed out - getForX is monadic so my code above would not work. The below version probably should:
foo x = do
y <- getForX x
return (x < y || y < 0)
Is there a way without using logic and bitwise operators, just arithmetic operators, to flip between integers with the value 0 and 1?
ie.
variable ?= variable will make the variable 1 if it 0 or 0 if it is 1.
x = 1 - x
Will switch between 0 and 1.
Edit: I misread the question, thought the OP could use any operator
A Few more...(ignore these)
x ^= 1 // bitwise operator
x = !x // logical operator
x = (x <= 0) // kinda the same as x != 1
Without using an operator?
int arr[] = {1,0}
x = arr[x]
Yet another way:
x = (x + 1) % 2
Assuming that it is initialized as a 0 or 1:
x = 1 - x
Comedy variation on st0le's second method
x = "\1"[x]
Another way to flip a bit.
x = ABS(x - 1) // the absolute of (x - 1)
int flip(int i){
return 1 - i;
};
Just for a bit of variety:
x = 1 / (x + 1);
x = (x == 0);
x = (x != 1);
Not sure whether you consider == and != to be arithmetic operators. Probably not, and obviously although they work in C, more strongly typed languages wouldn't convert the result to integer.
you can simply try this
+(!0) // output:1
+(!1) // output:0
You can use simple:
abs(x-1)
or just:
int(not x)