I am very noob at coding and I keep having the same error over and over. The loop is supposed to be run until correctGuesses reaches the value of 4, and then break the cycle and print 'terminal hacked'. I am running this in a private platform and I keep getting the same error "Your loop needs to stop when all 4 characters have been guessed". Does someone know why? Thank you so much in advance!
var correctGuesses = 0;
var randNum;
while (correctGuesses!==4) {
randNum=Math.floor(Math.random()*3);
if(randNum===1) {
correctGuesses=correctGuesses+1;
console.log("Found "+correctGuesses+ " characters");
} else if (randNum===2) {
correctGuesses=0;
console.log('Starting over');
} else if (randNum===3) {
correctGuesses=0;
}
} console.log('terminal hacked');
So I finally found the error. I had to put a if (correctGuesses===4){break;} right after the correctGuesses++ reached 4, because the goal was the cycle to be broken when correctGuesses===4. It was a school exercise and it clearly said that the cycle should end afater 4 correct guesses but I did not fully understand that before writing the code. Thank you all.
Given how the assignment is worded and the fact that random numbers are, well, random, my guess is that the platform you're writing this code for has overridden Math.random to supply a specific sequence of numbers and then they check the output you produce matches.
This means means that you simply need to follow the specifications and the outcome is not based on luck. There are two problems here
Generating an number between 1 and 3
You currently only generate a number between 0 and 2, since you're rounding down.
var randNum = Math.floor(Math.random() * 3);
console.log(randNum);
To get output between 1 and 3, the traditional way is to just add 1 to the output. Or more generally, you add the minimum to the output and generate between 0 and max - min:
function randomBetween(min, max) {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1) + min);
}
console.log("random between 2-5:", randomBetween(0, 2));
console.log("random between 1-3:", randomBetween(1, 3));
Keep correctGuesses the same value when randNum is 3
Cight now you're resetting correctGuesses to 0 when randNum === 3. So, if you fix the problem with being able to generate a 3, then this will be incorrect as per the requirement. The assignment doesn't have any other requirement for what happens when that number is generated, so since you have to keep the number unchanged, it's very simple - you don't do anything. Simply remove the entire if and your code would work as the requirement asks.
Conclusion
You code should look like this after you've made the changes:
var correctGuesses = 0;
var randNum;
while (correctGuesses !== 4) {
randNum = Math.floor(Math.random() * 3) + 1; //add 1 to generate numbers 1-3
if (randNum === 1) {
correctGuesses = correctGuesses + 1;
console.log("Found " + correctGuesses + " characters");
} else if (randNum === 2) {
correctGuesses = 0;
console.log('Starting over');
}
//don't do anything for randNum === 3
}
console.log('terminal hacked');
Related
I'm trying to make a simple rolling the dice mechanic with probabilities, if pass the level increase, if fail it decrease and if destroyed usually it resets to a certain level, but I'm having a hard time getting the right results, I am not sure if the outcome is supposed to be like this and just my intuition is wrong or something is actually messing it up.
Basically I am making a while loop that while below certain level it will roll the dice and given the results it will do something accordingly to the rates I input (40% for pass, 59.4% for fail and 0.6% to destroy). But when I do a test with 1000 tries, it always return me an average of destroyed way higher than 0.6%. I don't know if my test function is wrong, if the way I'm testing is wrong, if something on my loop is messing up the probabilities outcome.
function checkPass(successRate, failRate, destroyRate) {
let number = Math.random();
if (number < successRate) {
return 1;
} else if (number < failRate) {
return 0;
} else {
return 2;
}
}
function starforceSim(itemLevel) {
let newObj = {"level": 10, "totalMeso": 0, "destroyed": 0};
while (newObj.level < 11) {
if (newObj.level == 10) {
let passOutcome = checkPass(0.4, 0.994, 1)
if (passOutcome == 1) {
//newObj.totalMeso = newObj.totalMeso + (Math.round(1000 + (Math.pow(itemLevel, 3)) * (Math.pow(newObj.starlevel + 1, 2.7)) / 400));
newObj.level = newObj.level + 1;
} else if (passOutcome == 0) {
//newObj.totalMeso = newObj.totalMeso + (Math.round(1000 + (Math.pow(itemLevel, 3)) * (Math.pow(newObj.starlevel + 1, 2.7)) / 400));
//newObj.level = newObj.level - 1;
} else {
//newObj.totalMeso = newObj.totalMeso + (Math.round(1000 + (Math.pow(itemLevel, 3)) * (Math.pow(newObj.starlevel + 1, 2.7)) / 400));
newObj.destroyed = newObj.destroyed + 1
}
}
}
return newObj;
}
let counter = 0;
for (i=0; i<1000; i++) {
let n = starforceSim(140);
if (n.destroyed > 0) {
counter++
}
}
console.log(counter);
I disabled the decrease level when it fails just to focus on the destroy rates.
Is there a better way to code probabilities or to test them? Is there something wrong with my code?
Math.random is only pseudo-random1
1Source
This means you may not get a perfectly uniform distribution. In my own fiddling, it seems like randomness might get worse if you generate many values in rapid succession [citation needed].
If you want a better source of randomness, check out Crypto.getRandomValues.
I don't see anything wrong with your code. I think your expectations are just off. To verify that this is caused by lame randomness, take David Tansey's advice and study just the randomness output.
You may also notice different randomness quality in different browsers (or, different Javascript engines).
I'm getting undefined back everytime. I can't seem to get any out put for dice 1 and dice2.
I changed the while statement to a for statement to see if that was the issue. i tried to put in the outer while loop the condition (numberOfSides < 3 && dice1 != dice2 but that would continue to prompt me to enter a new numberOfSides. I've basically messed around with this thing trying rearranging variables.
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max + 1 - min)) + min;
}
var numberOfSides2 = numberOfSides
var dice2 = 0;
var dice1 = 0;
var numberOfRoles = 0;
var numberOfSides = parseInt(prompt("how many sides does your dice have, "));
while (numberOfSides < 3) {
numberOfSides = parseInt(prompt("enter the amount a number greater than 3, "));
}
while (dice1 != dice2) {
dice1 === getRandomInt(numberOfSides, numberOfSides2);
dice2 === getRandomInt(numberOfSides, numberOfSides2);
++numberOfRoles}
if (dice1 != dice2) {
alert(dice1);
}
I keep getting the message undefined. The more I try to fix it and rewrite it the more errors I seem to make. I am supposed to make it look like this but first, I want to make sure I can make it output something after running a function.
How many sides on your dice? -10
Sorry, that's not a valid size value. Please choose a positive number.
How many sides on your dice? 6
Thanks! Here we go ...
die number 1 is 5 and die number 2 is 3.
die number 1 is 2 and die number 2 is 2.
die number 1 is 1 and die number 2 is 5.
die number 1 is 5 and die number 2 is 1.
... (these triple dots mean the output keeps going, but just not for the sample, so we save space)
die number 1 is 1 and die number 2 is 1.
You got snake eyes! Finally! On try number 16!
Along the way you rolled doubles 5 times
The average roll for die #1 was 2.95
The average roll for die #2 was 3.20
I don't see the point of the numberOfSides2 variable as the getRandomInt function would always take 1 as its min value and the input from the user as the max value.
'===' is a comparison operator so you can't use it to assign a dice number to a random integer.
It is not quiet clear at what point you want the loop to stop so the following code stops when the users rolls a double.
getRandomInt = (min, max) => {
return Math.floor(Math.random() * (max + 1 - min)) + min;
};
let numOfSides = parseInt(prompt('how many sides does your dice have, '));
let dice1 = getRandomInt(1, numOfSides);
let dice2 = getRandomInt(1, numOfSides);
let numOfRoles = 1;
while (numOfSides < 3) {
numOfSides = parseInt(prompt('enter the amount a number greater than 3, '));
}
while (dice1 != dice2) {
dice1 = getRandomInt(1, numOfSides);
dice2 = getRandomInt(1, numOfSides);
numOfRoles++;
console.log(dice1);
console.log(dice2);
console.log('---');
}
if (dice1 === dice2) {
console.log('matching pair is ' + dice1);
}
To answer you question, you code would always return 0 for the value of dice1 and dice2 because you are using '===' instead of '='.
I'm trying to generate two numbers with a specific sum. Here is my proposed method:
Edited: http://jsfiddle.net/KDmwn/274/
$(document).ready(function () {
function GenerateRandomNumber() {
var min = -13, max = 13;
var random = Math.floor(Math.random() * (max - min + 1)) + min;
return random;
}
var x = GenerateRandomNumber();
function GenerateRandomNumber2() {
var min2 = -13, max2 = 13;
var random2 = Math.floor(Math.random() * (max2 - min2 + 1)) + min2;
if ((random2 + x) == 0){
return random2};
}
var xx = GenerateRandomNumber2();
There's something wrong with the if ((random2 + x) = 0) line, as the code runs perfectly fine when it's removed. How can I modify this line so that the sum of the two numbers is 0? It would be most helpful if someone could modify the Jsfiddle that I've included. Thanks!
This is invalid:
if ((random2 + x) = 0){
You cannot assign something to an expression.
You probably meant to use the comparison operator (==), like this:
if ((random2 + x) == 0){
Are you trying to make it only output a second number that, when added to the first, equals 0? Because it actually already does that - but only if it gets it on the first try (try hitting refresh at least 30 times.) You need to tell it to keep re-choosing (looping) the second random number while the sum isn't 0:
function GenerateRandomNumber2() {
var min2 = -13,
max2 = 13;
var random2;
while ((random2 + x) !== 0) {
random2 = Math.floor(Math.random() * (max2 - min2 + 1)) + min2;
}
return random2;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/vL77hjp0/
To take this one step further, if I'm reading this right (if not ignore this) it looks like you might want to eventually choose a random sum and have it determine the required second number to be added. To do this, we would replace the 0 in our "while" loop with 'sum'. And 'sum' would have to be defined as a random number with a "max=x+13" and "min=x-13" (otherwise the random number may be too high/low for random2 to ever reach, causing the browser to crash.) [Or just remove the limits from random2.]
http://jsfiddle.net/fkuo54hc/
First, your GenerateRandomNumbers2 function returns undefined value other than in your if statement. So you need to return a value. I updated your fiddle and refactor some of your code.
I'm trying to make it to where when a user does a certain thing, they get between 2 and 100 units. But for every 1,000 requests I want it to add up to 3,500 units given collectively.
Here's the code I have for adding different amounts randomly to a user:
if (Math.floor(Math.random() * 1000) + 1 === 900) {
//db call adding 100
}
else if (Math.floor(Math.random() * 100) + 1 === 90) {
//db call adding 40
}
else if (Math.floor(Math.random() * 30) + 1 === 20) {
//db call adding 10
}
else if (Math.floor(Math.random() * 5) + 1 === 4) {
//db call adding 5
}
else {
//db call adding 2
}
If my math is correct, this should average around 4,332 units per 1,000 calls. But obviously it would vary and I don't want that. I'd also like it to add random amounts instead, as the units added in my example are arbitrary.
EDIT: Guys, Gildor is right that I simply want to have 3,500 units, and give them away within 1,000 requests. It isn't even entirely necessary that it always reaches that maximum of 3,500 either (I could have specified that). The important thing is that I'm not giving users too much, while creating a chance for them to win a bigger amount.
Here's what I have set up now, and it's working well, and will work even better with some tweaking:
Outside of call:
var remaining = 150;
var count = 0;
Inside of call:
count += 1;
if (count === 100) {
remaining = 150;
count = 0;
}
if (Math.floor(Math.random() * 30) + 1 === 20) {
var addAmount = Math.floor(Math.random() * 85) + 15;
if (addAmount <= remaining) {
remaining -= addAmount;
//db call adding addAmount + 2
}
else {
//db call adding 2
}
}
else if (Math.floor(Math.random() * 5) + 1 === 4) {
var addAmount1 = Math.floor(Math.random() * 10) + 1;
if (addAmount1 <= remaining) {
remaining -= addAmount1;
//db call adding addAmount1 + 2
}
else {
//db call adding 2
}
}
else {
//db call adding 2
}
I guess I should have clarified, I want a "random" number with a high likelihood of being small. That's kind of part of the gimmick, where you have low probability of getting a larger amount.
As I've commented, 1,000 random numbers between 2 and 100 that add up to 3,500 is an average number of 3.5 which is not consistent with random choices between 2 and 100. You'd have to have nearly all 2 and 3 values in order to achieve that and, in fact couldn't have more than a couple large numbers. Nothing even close to random. So, for this to even be remotely random and feasible, you'd have to pick a total much large than 3,500. A random total of 1,000 numbers between 2 and 100 would be more like 51,000.
Furthermore, you can't dynamically generate each number in a truly random fashion and guarantee a particular total. The main way to guarantee that outcome is to pre-allocate random numbers that add up to the total that are known to achieve that and then random select each number from the pre-allocated scheme, then remove that from the choice for future selections.
You could also try to keep a running total and bias your randomness if you get skewed away form your total, but doing it that way, the last set of numbers may have to be not even close to random in order to hit your total consistently.
A scheme that could work if you reset the total to support what it should be for actual randomness (e.g. to 51,000) would be to preallocated an array of 500 random numbers between 2 and 100 and then add another 500 numbers that are the complements of those. This guarantees the 51 avg number. You can then select each number randomly from the pre-allocated array and then remove it form the array so it won't be selected again. I can add code to do this in a second.
function RandResults(low, high, qty) {
var results = new Array(qty);
var limit = qty/2;
var avg = (low + high) / 2;
for (var i = 0; i < limit; i++) {
results[i] = Math.floor((Math.random() * (high - low)) + low);
//
results[qty - i - 1] = (2 * avg) - results[i];
}
this.results = results;
}
RandResults.prototype.getRand = function() {
if (!this.results.length) {
throw new Error("getRand() called, but results are empty");
}
var randIndex = Math.floor(Math.random() * this.results.length);
var value = this.results[randIndex];
this.results.splice(randIndex, 1);
return value;
}
RandResults.prototype.getRemaining = function() {
return this.results.length;
}
var randObj = new RandResults(2, 100, 1000);
// get next single random value
if (randObj.getRemaining()) {
var randomValue = randObj.getRand();
}
Working demo for a truly random selection of numbers that add up to 51,000 (which is what 1,000 random values between 2 and 100 should add up to): http://jsfiddle.net/jfriend00/wga26n7p/
If what you want is the following: 1,000 numbers that add up to 3,500 and are selected from between the range 2 to 100 (inclusive) where most numbers will be 2 or 3, but occasionally something could be up to 100, then that's a different problem. I wouldn't really use the word random to describe it because it's a highly biased selection.
Here's a way to do that. It generates 1,000 random numbers between 2 and 100, keeping track of the total. Then, afterwards it corrects the random numbers to hit the right total by randomly selected values and decrementing them until the total is down to 3,500. You can see it work here: http://jsfiddle.net/jfriend00/m4ouonj4/
The main part of the code is this:
function RandResults(low, high, qty, total) {
var results = new Array(qty);
var runningTotal = 0, correction, index, trial;
for (var i = 0; i < qty; i++) {
runningTotal += results[i] = Math.floor((Math.random() * (high - low)) + low);
}
// now, correct to hit the total
if (runningTotal > total) {
correction = -1;
} else if (runningTotal < total) {
correction = 1;
}
// loop until we've hit the total
// randomly select a value to apply the correction to
while (runningTotal !== total) {
index = Math.floor(Math.random() * qty);
trial = results[index] + correction;
if (trial >= low && trial <= high) {
results[index] = trial;
runningTotal += correction;
}
}
this.results = results;
}
This meets an objective of a biased total of 3,500 and all numbers between 2 and 100, though the probability of a 2 in this scheme is very high and the probably of a 100 in this scheme is almost non-existent.
And, here's a weighted random generator that adds up to a precise total. This uses a cubic weighting scheme to favor the lower numbers (the probably of a number goes down with the cube of the number) and then after the random numbers are generated, a correction algorithm applies random corrections to the numbers to make the total come out exactly as specified. The code for a working demo is here: http://jsfiddle.net/jfriend00/g6mds8rr/
function RandResults(low, high, numPicks, total) {
var avg = total / numPicks;
var i, j;
// calculate probabilities for each value
// by trial and error, we found that a cubic weighting
// gives an approximately correct sub-total that can then
// be corrected to the exact total
var numBuckets = high - low + 1;
var item;
var probabilities = [];
for (i = 0; i < numBuckets; i++) {
item = low + i;
probabilities[i] = avg / (item * item * item);
}
// now using those probabilities, create a steps array
var sum = 0;
var steps = probabilities.map(function(item) {
sum += item;
return sum;
});
// now generate a random number and find what
// index it belongs to in the steps array
// and use that as our pick
var runningTotal = 0, rand;
var picks = [], pick, stepsLen = steps.length;
for (i = 0; i < numPicks; i++) {
rand = Math.random() * sum;
for (j = 0; j < stepsLen; j++) {
if (steps[j] >= rand) {
pick = j + low;
picks.push(pick);
runningTotal += pick;
break;
}
}
}
var correction;
// now run our correction algorithm to hit the total exactly
if (runningTotal > total) {
correction = -1;
} else if (runningTotal < total) {
correction = 1;
}
// loop until we've hit the total
// randomly select a value to apply the correction to
while (runningTotal !== total) {
index = Math.floor(Math.random() * numPicks);
trial = picks[index] + correction;
if (trial >= low && trial <= high) {
picks[index] = trial;
runningTotal += correction;
}
}
this.results = picks;
}
RandResults.prototype.getRand = function() {
if (!this.results.length) {
throw new Error("getRand() called, but results are empty");
}
return this.results.pop();
}
RandResults.prototype.getAllRand = function() {
if (!this.results.length) {
throw new Error("getAllRand() called, but results are empty");
}
var r = this.results;
this.results = [];
return r;
}
RandResults.prototype.getRemaining = function() {
return this.results.length;
}
As some comments pointed out... the numbers in the question does not quite make sense, but conceptually there are two approaches: calculate dynamically just in time or ahead of time.
To calculate just in time:
You can maintain a remaining variable which tracks how many of 3500 left. Each time when you randomly give some units, subtract the number from remaining until it goes to 0.
In addition, to make sure each time at least 2 units are given, you can start with remaining = 1500 and give random + 2 units each time.
To prevent cases that after 1000 gives there are still balances left, you may need to add some logic to give units more aggressively towards the last few times. However it will result in not-so-random results.
To calculate ahead of time:
Generate a random list with 1000 values in [2, 100] and sums up to 3500. Then shuffle the list. Each time you want to give some units, pick the next item in the array. After 1000 gives, generate another list in the same way. This way you get much better randomized results.
Be aware that both approaches requires some kind of shared state that needs to be handled carefully in a multi-threaded environment.
Hope the ideas help.
I'm pretty awful at Javascript as I've just started learning.
I'm doing a Luhn check for a 16-digit credit card.
It's driving me nuts and I'd just appreciate if someone looked over it and could give me some help.
<script>
var creditNum;
var valid = new Boolean(true);
creditNum = prompt("Enter your credit card number: ");
if((creditNum==null)||(creditNum=="")){
valid = false;
alert("Invalid Number!\nThere was no input.");
}else if(creditNum.length!=16){
valid = false;
alert("Invalid Number!\nThe number is the wrong length.");
}
//Luhn check
var c;
var digitOne;
var digitTwo;
var numSum;
for(i=0;i<16;i+2){
c = creditNum.slice(i,i+1);
if(c.length==2){
digitOne = c.slice(0,1);
digitTwo = c.slice(1,2);
numSum = numSum + (digitOne + digitTwo);
}else{
numSum = numSum + c;
}
}
if((numSum%10)!=0){
alert("Invalid Number!");
}else{
alert("Credit Card Accepted!");
}
</script>
The immediate problem in your code is your for loop. i+2 is not a proper third term. From the context, you're looking for i = i + 2, which you can write in shorthand as i += 2.
It seems your algorithm is "take the 16 digits, turn them into 8 pairs, add them together, and see if the sum is divisible by 10". If that's the case, you can massively simplify your loop - you never need to look at the tens' place, just the units' place.
Your loop could look like this and do the same thing:
for (i = 1; i < 16; i +=2) {
numSum += +creditNum[i];
}
Also, note that as long as you're dealing with a string, you don't need to slice anything at all - just use array notation to get each character.
I added a + in front of creditNum. One of the issues with javascript is that it will treat a string as a string, so if you have string "1" and string "3" and add them, you'll concatenate and get "13" instead of 4. The plus sign forces the string to be a number, so you'll get the right result.
The third term of the loop is the only blatant bug I see. I don't actually know the Luhn algorithm, so inferred the rest from the context of your code.
EDIT
Well, it would have helped if you had posted what the Luhn algorithm is. Chances are, if you can at least articulate it, you can help us help you code it.
Here's what you want.
// Luhn check
function luhnCheck(sixteenDigitString) {
var numSum = 0;
var value;
for (var i = 0; i < 16; ++i) {
if (i % 2 == 0) {
value = 2 * sixteenDigitString[i];
if (value >= 10) {
value = (Math.floor(value / 10) + value % 10);
}
} else {
value = +sixteenDigitString[i];
}
numSum += value;
}
return (numSum % 10 == 0);
}
alert(luhnCheck("4111111111111111"));
What this does is go through all the numbers, keeping the even indices as they are, but doubling the odd ones. If the doubling is more than nine, the values of the two digits are added together, as per the algorithm stated in wikipedia.
FIDDLE
Note: the number I tested with isn't my credit card number, but it's a well known number you can use that's known to pass a properly coded Luhn verification.
My below solution will work on AmEx also. I submitted it for a code test a while ago. Hope it helps :)
function validateCard(num){
var oddSum = 0;
var evenSum = 0;
var numToString = num.toString().split("");
for(var i = 0; i < numToString.length; i++){
if(i % 2 === 0){
if(numToString[i] * 2 >= 10){
evenSum += ((numToString[i] * 2) - 9 );
} else {
evenSum += numToString[i] * 2;
}
} else {
oddSum += parseInt(numToString[i]);
}
}
return (oddSum + evenSum) % 10 === 0;
}
console.log(validateCard(41111111111111111));
Enjoy - Mitch from https://spangle.com.au
#Spangle, when you're using even and odd here, you're already considering that index 0 is even? So you're doubling the digits at index 0, 2 and so on and not the second position, fourth and so on.. Is that intentional? It's returning inconsistent validations for some cards here compared with another algorithm I'm using. Try for example AmEx's 378282246310005.