|
Can i perform a comparison operation without using IF statement.
For example:
<br />
if( x< 0.5 || x > 1.0 )<br />
return 0;<br />
else<br />
return 1;<br />
Here the values 0.5 and 1.0 are fixed ie. the condition always check for 0.5 and 1.0 and no other values.
Can i replace the above If-else statement?
-- modified at 9:37 Monday 11th December, 2006
i made the mistake of puting && instead of ||.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. As the condition never will be true, you can replace it with:
return 1;
---
b { font-weight: normal; }
|
|
|
|
|
 What happens when x = 0.75 then?
I have no idea what I just said. But my intentions were sincere.
|
|
|
|
|
I see that you have changed the condition since I answered the question.
---
b { font-weight: normal; }
|
|
|
|
|
There are many ways to do it (but why would you ?). To show a few:
1.
bool valid=x<0.5 && x>1.0;
2.
return x<0.5 && x>1.0 ? 0 : 1;
3.
for(; x<0.5 && x>1.0; ) return 0; return 1;
4.
while (x<0.5 && x>1.0) return 0; return 1;
5.
int[] array=new int[1];
array[(int)(2*x-1.0)]=1;
array[(int)(1.0-x)]=1;
remark: your specific example will always return 1 !
Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
This looks like C#; not c or C++.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
You are right, my examples were using C#, but the first four do have a C equivalent.
Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
The condition itself has a value. Simply change it so that it evaluated to True when the variable is inside the interval, and return the value.
return (x >= 0.5 && x <= 1.0);
I'm not sure, but the value of True might be -1 rather than 1. It might also depend on the implementation. Anyhow, a binary and with one assures that the value is 1 in either case.
return (x >= 0.5 && x <= 1.0) & 1;
---
b { font-weight: normal; }
|
|
|
|
|
No.
Even if they are not written in the code, they will be implicitly done. I can also imagine that the optimizer will resolve that code into something optimal; do not try to outsmart the compiler and write code that is as simple as possible and as readable as possible.
if you have a function that does something like
return ( x< 0.5 || x > 1.0 )
The caller will mostly do something with that boolean value :
double x = 0.2;
bool bValue = MyFunction( x );
if ( bValue )
...
|
|
|
|
|
Try this:
return (x>=0.5 && x<=1.0);
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Why not just write
return (x < 0.5 || x > 1.0) ? 0 : 1;
This is without the if, but it performs the same result.
What you can do otherwise is
return (x >= 0.5 && x <= 1.0);
which would return true (i.e. non-zero) if x is between 0.5 and 1.0, and zero otherwise.
Internet - the worlds biggest dictionary
|
|
|
|
|
Try this:
#define MISTERY(x,v) (((x)<(v))? 1 : 0 )
#define SECRET(x,a,b) ( ! ( MISTERY(x,a) || MISTERY(-x,-b) ) )
Then, in your function:
return SECRET(x,0.5,1.0)
Not only I avoided using the dreaded if statement, but I also succeeded in making the code more dificult to predict. A genuine 2 in 1.
Anyway, the only reason I see to avoid using the if statement is to look good when answering a teacher's question! :-P
Rogério Rilhas
PS: I sincerely hope there is no hidden bug in this code!!
|
|
|
|
|
how to read outlook express file inbox.dbx to simple english .
how we can recover deleted mail from inbox.dbx
naveen padiyar
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I want to know how to create (control the generation of) my own public & private key pairs, is it correct to use the following codes? And what are valid parameters P, Q, Modulus, any sample codes?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
RSACryptoServiceProvider rsa = new RSACryptoServiceProvider(1024);
System.Security.Cryptography.RSAParameters parameters = new System.Security.Cryptography.RSAParameters();
parameters.P=???;
parameters.Modulus=???;
.............
...............
rsa.ImportParameters(parameters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks & best regards,
Ed.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello
This is my first programming class and I need help. I am being asked to design an algorithm for a converter that converts
units in Metric to English and vice versa. The choice of code is pseudocode.
Please if someone would at least write an example for me of this code I could study it and use it as a teaching aide to help me understand how this works.
Thank You
|
|
|
|
|
xcom2001 wrote: Please if someone would at least write an example for me of this code I could study it and use it as a teaching aide to help me understand how this works.
pseudocode is an english like structured language, which basically means it is what you want it to be. It is Pseudo because it is not a real language and is not meant to represent any real language. If you are not an english speaker, pseudocode is what ever you generally speak.
a quicksort algorithm which is a divide and conquor technique that is very famous, would look like this:
function quicksort(a, left, right)
while right > left
select a pivot value a[pivotIndex]
pivotNewIndex := partition(a, left, right, pivotIndex)
leftSize := (pivotNewIndex-1) - left + 1
rightSize := right - (pivotNewIndex + 1) + 1
if leftSize < rightSize
quicksort(a, left, pivotNewIndex-1)
left := pivotNewIndex+1
else
quicksort(a, pivotNewIndex+1, right)
right := pivotNewIndex-1
_________________________
Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau.
Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
|
|
|
|
|
xcom2001 wrote: This is my first programming class and I need help. I am being asked to design an algorithm for a converter that converts
units in Metric to English and vice versa. The choice of code is pseudocode.
Please if someone would at least write an example for me of this code I could study it and use it as a teaching aide to help me understand how this works.
Here is an example of one of the routines you will need:
To convert some centigrade degrees to some fahrenheit degrees:
Put the centigrade degrees into the fahrenheit degrees.
Multiply the fahrenheit degrees by 9.
Divide the fahrenheit degrees by 5.
Add 32 to the fahrenheit degrees. Incidently, though most people would consider this "pseudocode", it is actually Plain English code and can be compiled and run using the Osmosian Order's Plain English development system (which was written entirely in Plain English).
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: is actually Plain English code and can be compiled and run using the Osmosian Order's Plain English development system
|
|
|
|
|
That's great, but can you please stop using every chance you see to include the words "can be compiled and run using the Osmosian Order's Plain English development system (which was written entirely in Plain English)" or any variant thereof.
I don't want a discussion on how you didn't actually include an email address or URL, or how you are helping this person by providing a solution that is also in actual 'useable' code. I just want you, as I have asked many times before, to cease using these forums for self promotion.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I just want you, as I have asked many times before, to cease using these forums for self promotion.
Self promotion, as we've discussed before, is the wrong term. As I've said many times before, what we're promoting is ideas - in this case, the ideas that (1) people naturally think, not in artificial languages, but in natural languages, of which pseudocode is a degenerate case; and (2) since pseudocode-like languages can be compiled and run and used to develop even low-level programs like compilers and high-level programs like page editors, we should all reconsider the role of artifical/natural languages in computer programming. The original poster is just starting out and we wouldn't want this person to be denied exposure to all aspects of "state of the art", now would we?
Our Plain English development system is nothing but a "proof of concept" that we offer, here and elsewhere, to eliminate unnecessary responses claiming our ideas are "nice, but impractical". That's all. The product is not important except as a working manifestation of the ideas behind it.
|
|
|
|
|
I will repeat: Enough is enough.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Enough is enough.
But enough of what?
Exhibit A - In a thread about Latex I suggest that a wysiwyg approach might be a better alternative, with a reference to a commercial product as proof of concept [^].
Exhibit B - In a thread about pseudocode I suggest that thinking of pseudocode as real code might be a better alternative, with a reference to a commercial product as proof of concept [^].
What's the difference? And please don't say that I have a vested interest in one and not the other because (a) you don't know that, and (b) it wouldn't affect the points being made anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: Chris Maunder wrote:
Enough is enough.
But enough of what?
enough of you of course... !
|
|
|
|
|
toxcct wrote: enough of you of course... !
Some people have a memory and an attention span, you should try them out one day. - Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I will repeat: Enough is enough.
If you try to write that in English, I might be able to understand more than a fraction of it. - Guffa
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
