I'm writing a for loop for a project that prompts the user to input a number and keeps prompting, continually adding the numbers up. When a string is introduced, the loop should stop. I've done it with a while loop, but the project states that we must do it with a for loop also. The problem is that the prompt keeps running even when 'a = false'. Could someone explain javascript's thinking process? I want to understand why it keeps running back through the loop even though the condition isn't met. Thank you
var addSequence2 = function() {
var total = 0;
var a;
for (; a = true; ) {
var input = prompt("Your current score is " +total+ "\n" + "Next number...");
if (!isNaN(input)) {
a = true;
total = +total + +input;
}
else if (isNaN(input)) {
a = false;
document.write("Your total is " + total);
}
}
};
There is a difference between a = true and a == true.
Your for-loop is basically asking "can I set 'a' to true?", to which the answer is yes, and the loop continues.
Change the condition to a == true (thus asking "Is the value of 'a' true?")
To elaborate, in most programming languages, we distinguish between assignment ("Make 'x' be 4") and testing for equality ("Is 'x' 4?"). By convention (at least in languages that derive their syntax from C), we use '=' to assign/set a value, and '==' to test.
If I'm understanding the specification correctly (no guarantee), what happens here is that the condition condenses as follows:
Is (a = true) true?
Complete the bracket: set a to true
Is (a) true? (we just set it to true, so it must be!)
Try using the equal to operator, i.e. change
for (; a = true; ) {
to
for (; a == true; ) {
You should use a == true instead of a = true......= is an assignment operator
for (; a = true; ), you are assigning the value to the variable "a" and it will always remain true and will end up in infinite loop. In JavaScript it should a===true.
I suspect you want your for to look like this :
for(;a==true;)
as a=true is an assignment, not a comparison.
a == true. The double equal sign compares the two. Single equal assigns the value true to a so this always returns true.
for (; a = true; ) <-- this is an assignation
for (; a == true; ) <-- this should be better
Here's your fixed code :
var addSequence2 = function() {
var total = 0;
var a = true;
for(;Boolean(a);) {
var input = prompt("Your current score is " +total+ "\n" + "Next number...");
if (!isNaN(input)) {
total = total + input;
}
else{
a = false;
document.write("Your total is " + total);
}
}
};
Related
In the following code variable 'checkNumber' is not incrementing to 1 even after 'if' block get executed and so that Break is not working where i need to break the loop
var checkNumber =0
for (let i = 0; i < totalRowCountAllocPrj; i++){
allocationObjects.getAllocationStatusfromGrid(i).then(text => {
appAllocStatus = Cypress.$(text).text()
cy.log("Allocation Status :" + appAllocStatus)
if(appAllocStatus == userData.approvalReservedAllocStatus){
allocationObjects.getAppAllCheckBoxesfromGrid(i).click()
checkNumber=checkNumber+1
cy.log("index="+i)
}
else{
cy.log("Project is not Reserved")
}
})
cy.log("number="+checkNumber)
if(checkNumber==1)
{
break
}
The variable checkNumber gets incremented inside an asynchronous command, but the loop is running synchronously.
You can't use break but you should be able to stop executing the commands with the inverse check.
Since checkNumber never should go above 0, it's more sensible to use a boolean
let found = 0
for (let i = 0; i < totalRowCountAllocPrj; i++) {
cy.then(() => {
if (!found) {
allocationObjects.getAllocationStatusfromGrid(i).then(text => {
appAllocStatus = Cypress.$(text).text()
if (appAllocStatus === userData.approvalReservedAllocStatus) {
allocationObjects.getAppAllCheckBoxesfromGrid(i).click()
found = true
}
})
}
})
}
BTW you should be able to rewrite allocationObjects.getAllocationStatusfromGrid() to directly search for userData.approvalReservedAllocStatus and get rid of the loop altogether.
I am new to this an am trying to learn as much as I can. I have a variable that has a numerical value, I want an if statement that will look at this value and give an err if this value is not an integer. Can someone help?
Thanks
You can check it like this and then work with number inside the if clause:
if let number = numericalValue as? Int {
// numericalValue is an Int
} else {
// numericalValue is not an Int
}
I use Int() coupled with an if statement to achieve this:
//var number = 17 - will print "17 is an integer"
//var number = "abc" - will print "Error"
if let numberTest = Int(number) {
print("\(number) is an integer")
} else {
print("Error")
}
I managed to solve it in the end. I found the remainder operator in the Swift manual. Thought if I used that, divided by 1, if there was a remainder then the original value couldn't be an integer. So my code was - else if ((Double(guessEnteredNumber.text!)!) % 1 ) > 0 { resultText.text = "You need to guess a whole number between 1 and 5"
In swift 2 you can now use the 'guard' keyword like this
guard let number = myNumber as Int else {
// myNumber is not an Int
return
}
// myNumber is an Int and you can use number as it is not null
You can replace the 'let' keyword by a 'var' if you need to modify 'number' afterward
const char IsPressed = 1; // 1
const char WasHeldDown = 2; // 10
const char IsFirstPress = 4; // 100
char* keystates[256];
Class::CalculateKeyStates()
{
for(int i = 0; i < 256; ++i)
{
if(this->IsDown(i))
{
keystates[i] |= IsPressed; // turn on
if(keystates[i] & WasHeldDown)
{
//keystates[i] |= IsFirstPress;
keystates[i] &= ~IsFirstPress; // turn off
}
else
{
keystates[i] |= WasHeldDown + IsFirstPress; // Turn on
}
}
else
{
keystates[i] = 0; // Turn ALL off
}
}
}
This function would be a member function of a class, Class. The other member function, IsDown, will return a true if the key in question is down and false if not.
Can you see any way of further improving this function?
Thanks
EDIT:
I will expand a bit as to what is done why. This is a modification of an bit of code that works through an array keyStates (which was a struct of three bools) setting IsPressed to false for all of the keys. then again setting Ispressed to the value of this->IsDown and then a third time looping through checking if the key had been held, if it has then its no longer the first press so set that to false. if it was not held down, then set first press to true and was held to true as well, so next time it is flagged as having been held.
EDIT2:
Added some comments to code and corrected one line
Personally, I would define the key-states as disjoint states and write a simple state-machine, thus:
enum keystate
{
inactive,
firstPress,
active
};
keystate keystates[256];
Class::CalculateKeyStates()
{
for (int i = 0; i < 256; ++i)
{
keystate &k = keystates[i];
switch (k)
{
inactive:
k = (isDown(i)) ? firstPress : inactive;
break;
firstPress:
k = (isDown(i)) ? active : inactive;
break;
active:
k = (isDown(i)) ? active : inactive;
break;
}
}
}
This is easier to extend, and easier to read if it gets any more complex.
You are always setting IsFirstPress if the key is down, which might not be what you want.
I'm not sure what you want to achieve with IsFirstPress, as the keystate cannot remember any previous presses anyways. If you want to mark with this bit, that it's the first time you recognized the key being down, then your logic is wrong in the corresponding if statement.
keystates[i] & WasHeldDown evaluates to true if you already set the bit WasHeldDown earlier for this keystate.
In that case, what you may want to do is actually remove the IsFirstPress bit by xor-ing it: keystates[i] ^= IsFirstPress
How can we do validation for percentage numbers in textbox .
I need to validate these type of data
Ex: 12-3, 33.44a, 44. , a3.56, 123
thanks in advance
sri
''''Add textbox'''''
<asp:TextBox ID="PERCENTAGE" runat="server"
onkeypress="return ispercentage(this, event, true, false);"
MaxLength="18" size="17"></asp:TextBox>
'''''Copy below function as it is and paste in tag..'''''''
<script type="text/javascript">
function ispercentage(obj, e, allowDecimal, allowNegative)
{
var key;
var isCtrl = false;
var keychar;
var reg;
if (window.event)
{
key = e.keyCode;
isCtrl = window.event.ctrlKey
}
else if (e.which)
{
key = e.which;
isCtrl = e.ctrlKey;
}
if (isNaN(key)) return true;
keychar = String.fromCharCode(key);
// check for backspace or delete, or if Ctrl was pressed
if (key == 8 || isCtrl)
{
return true;
}
ctemp = obj.value;
var index = ctemp.indexOf(".");
var length = ctemp.length;
ctemp = ctemp.substring(index, length);
if (index < 0 && length > 1 && keychar != '.' && keychar != '0')
{
obj.focus();
return false;
}
if (ctemp.length > 2)
{
obj.focus();
return false;
}
if (keychar == '0' && length >= 2 && keychar != '.' && ctemp != '10') {
obj.focus();
return false;
}
reg = /\d/;
var isFirstN = allowNegative ? keychar == '-' && obj.value.indexOf('-') == -1 : false;
var isFirstD = allowDecimal ? keychar == '.' && obj.value.indexOf('.') == -1 : false;
return isFirstN || isFirstD || reg.test(keychar);
}
</script>
You can further optimize this expression. Currently its working for all given patterns.
^\d*[aA]?[\-.]?\d*[aA]?[\-.]?\d*$
If you're talking about checking that a given text is a valid percentage, you can do one of a few things.
validate it with a regex like ^[0-9]+\.?[0-9]*$ then just convert that to a floating point value and check it's between 0 and 100 (that particular regex requires a zero before the decimal for values less than one but you can adapt it to handle otherwise).
convert it to a float using a method that raises an exception on invalid data (rather than just stopping at the first bad character.
use a convoluted regex which checks for valid entries without having to convert to a float.
just run through the text character by character counting numerics (a), decimal points (b) and non-numerics (c). Provided a is at least one, b is at most one, and c is zero, then convert to a float.
I have no idea whether your environment support any of those options since you haven't actually specified what it is :-)
However, my preference is to go for option 1, 2, 4 and 3 (in that order) since I'm not a big fan of convoluted regexes. I tend to think that they do more harm than good when thet become to complex to understand in less than three seconds.
Finally i tried a simple validation and works good :-(
function validate(){
var str = document.getElementById('percentage').value;
if(isNaN(str))
{
//alert("value out of range or too much decimal");
}
else if(str > 100)
{
//alert("value exceeded");
}
else if(str < 0){
//alert("value not valid");
}
}
The most egregiously redundant code construct I often see involves using the code sequence
if (condition)
return true;
else
return false;
instead of simply writing
return (condition);
I've seen this beginner error in all sorts of languages: from Pascal and C to PHP and Java. What other such constructs would you flag in a code review?
if (foo == true)
{
do stuff
}
I keep telling the developer that does that that it should be
if ((foo == true) == true)
{
do stuff
}
but he hasn't gotten the hint yet.
if (condition == true)
{
...
}
instead of
if (condition)
{
...
}
Edit:
or even worse and turning around the conditional test:
if (condition == false)
{
...
}
which is easily read as
if (condition) then ...
Using comments instead of source control:
-Commenting out or renaming functions instead of deleting them and trusting that source control can get them back for you if needed.
-Adding comments like "RWF Change" instead of just making the change and letting source control assign the blame.
Somewhere I’ve spotted this thing, which I find to be the pinnacle of boolean redundancy:
return (test == 1)? ((test == 0) ? 0 : 1) : ((test == 0) ? 0 : 1);
:-)
Redundant code is not in itself an error. But if you're really trying to save every character
return (condition);
is redundant too. You can write:
return condition;
Declaring separately from assignment in languages other than C:
int foo;
foo = GetFoo();
Returning uselessly at the end:
// stuff
return;
}
I once had a guy who repeatedly did this:
bool a;
bool b;
...
if (a == true)
b = true;
else
b = false;
void myfunction() {
if(condition) {
// Do some stuff
if(othercond) {
// Do more stuff
}
}
}
instead of
void myfunction() {
if(!condition)
return;
// Do some stuff
if(!othercond)
return;
// Do more stuff
}
Using .tostring on a string
Putting an exit statement as first statement in a function to disable the execution of that function, instead of one of the following options:
Completely removing the function
Commenting the function body
Keeping the function but deleting all the code
Using the exit as first statement makes it very hard to spot, you can easily read over it.
Fear of null (this also can lead to serious problems):
if (name != null)
person.Name = name;
Redundant if's (not using else):
if (!IsPostback)
{
// do something
}
if (IsPostback)
{
// do something else
}
Redundant checks (Split never returns null):
string[] words = sentence.Split(' ');
if (words != null)
More on checks (the second check is redundant if you are going to loop)
if (myArray != null && myArray.Length > 0)
foreach (string s in myArray)
And my favorite for ASP.NET: Scattered DataBinds all over the code in order to make the page render.
Copy paste redundancy:
if (x > 0)
{
// a lot of code to calculate z
y = x + z;
}
else
{
// a lot of code to calculate z
y = x - z;
}
instead of
if (x > 0)
y = x + CalcZ(x);
else
y = x - CalcZ(x);
or even better (or more obfuscated)
y = x + (x > 0 ? 1 : -1) * CalcZ(x)
Allocating elements on the heap instead of the stack.
{
char buff = malloc(1024);
/* ... */
free(buff);
}
instead of
{
char buff[1024];
/* ... */
}
or
{
struct foo *x = (struct foo *)malloc(sizeof(struct foo));
x->a = ...;
bar(x);
free(x);
}
instead of
{
struct foo x;
x.a = ...;
bar(&x);
}
The most common redundant code construct I see is code that is never called from anywhere in the program.
The other is design patterns used where there is no point in using them. For example, writing "new BobFactory().createBob()" everywhere, instead of just writing "new Bob()".
Deleting unused and unnecessary code can massively improve the quality of the system and the team's ability to maintain it. The benefits are often startling to teams who have never considered deleting unnecessary code from their system. I once performed a code review by sitting with a team and deleting over half the code in their project without changing the functionality of their system. I thought they'd be offended but they frequently asked me back for design advice and feedback after that.
I often run into the following:
function foo() {
if ( something ) {
return;
} else {
do_something();
}
}
But it doesn't help telling them that the else is useless here. It has to be either
function foo() {
if ( something ) {
return;
}
do_something();
}
or - depending on the length of checks that are done before do_something():
function foo() {
if ( !something ) {
do_something();
}
}
From nightmarish code reviews.....
char s[100];
followed by
memset(s,0,100);
followed by
s[strlen(s)] = 0;
with lots of nasty
if (strcmp(s, "1") == 0)
littered about the code.
Using an array when you want set behavior. You need to check everything to make sure its not in the array before you insert it, which makes your code longer and slower.
Redundant .ToString() invocations:
const int foo = 5;
Console.WriteLine("Number of Items: " + foo.ToString());
Unnecessary string formatting:
const int foo = 5;
Console.WriteLine("Number of Items: {0}", foo);