Array questions

[Nathan4102]

I'm making a minesweeper game for my summative, and I'm kind of stuck on something. What would be the most efficient way to store data for each individual cell(Click/Notclicked, number displayed, contains mine/doesn't)? I've taken a look at records, but i'm not sure if it'll work with what I need. Another possibility is a 2d array of strings, with each string containing info for the cell that could be dissected when needed, but if there's a better way, I don't want to get into all that string manipulation stuff.
Thanks!
Nathan

[Raknarg]

Sure, array of records would do just the trick.

For instance, you could do this:

Turing:

%Lets say you had a 50x50 grid type gridData :     record         clicked, hasMine : boolean         display : string     end record     var grid : array 1 .. 50, 1 .. 50 of gridData

Lets say you wanted to see if the cell 45, 30 is clicked. You can call the variable there by calling:

grid (45, 30).clicked

So records in this case would be very useful. Not to mention, it's good to learn because it helps you understand the use of classes later (which are super useful, which you should aslo learn at some point soon)

[Nathan4102]

Oh, sweet! I didn't think records would work with arrays, but if they do, I'll use them. I'll learn classes next year when I need them in ICS, for now, I'll stick with procedural programming.

[Raknarg]

gridData is a type the same way int or real are types, so they can be used in the same ways. You can result gridData, or take it in as a parameter if you want to

[Raknarg]

You don't have to wait btw. Do you code stuff for fun on your own time?

[Nathan4102]

Man, I wish I knew about records earlier. I could have used them in some old projects. I usually have a couple projects going for fun, but my main focus is on schoolwork.

[Raknarg]

That happens all the time. Once i learned array, once I learned records, once I learned classes, or random algorithms

[Nathan4102]

I'd like to learn classes, but I haven't seen any practical use of them where they are superior to procedures/functions! I tried learning about them once, but all this Dog.Bark and Dog.Walk stuff seemed pointless to me.

[Raknarg]

It's useful if you have things that are actual objects. They can have all their own variables, and do all their calculations within the class.

For instance, have you ever tried making a button in turing? It's a tedious process, especially if you have more than one button. Hoever, you can create a class that handles everything for you. You want to know if the button is clicked? The class will perform calculations that are in the class, and call button -> is_clicked. You're done.

Want to draw the button? button -> draw

What if you have an entire page full of buttons? JUst call a procedure to initialize them all, and you're done. It's easy, and clean, and very useful.

You can check this out if you want: http://compsci.ca/v3/viewtopic.php?t=30797

[Nathan4102]

Buttons are a pain in turing... I guess classes do have a use, but you can't use classes in turing, can you??

[Raknarg]

Absolutely you can

[Nathan4102]

I thought classes were only supported by OOP languages. I'll check em out soon!

[Raknarg]

Turing:

class word      export set_s, show_s            var s : string            proc set_s (s_ : string)          s := s_      end set_s            proc show_s          put s      end show_s end word var foo : pointer to word new word, foo foo -> set_s ("hi") foo -> show_s

super redundant,. but yeah

[Nathan4102]

That's pretty neat... and confusing! Is that foo part necessary? or can you not call Word.set_s without it?

[Raknarg]

You can't do that. Class is pretty similar to the type thing we talked about earlier. This is like a template for what you want each pointer to hold (a pointer is a variable that uses the class, btw). We can set 100 variables to this class, and they'd all have the same functions, but we could make them different.

Turing:

class word      export set_s, show_s            var s : string            proc set_s (s_ : string)          s := s_      end set_s            proc show_s          put s      end show_s end word var word1, word2 : pointer to word new word, word1 new word, word2 word1 -> set_s ("hello ") word2 -> set_s ("world") word1 -> show_s word2 -> show_s