4 ms·

It's a nice idea and really well executed but the second test just demonstrates to me how JS is not an ideal language for a beginner to learn as you're thrown s

by bjpirt 9y ago

It's a nice idea and really well executed but the second test just demonstrates to me how JS is not an ideal language for a beginner to learn as you're thrown straight into async execution and having to work around the fact that functions execute immediately with arcane workarounds. I still think Python is the most straightforward to learn, even though the whitespace constantly catches beginners out too.

always_good 9y ago
I don't understand. Are you referring to Level 2? What's going on there is just that the robot can only enqueue a single action for the tick. So calling multiple actions will just overwrite the slot. It's an implementation detail of the game. Maybe it's tougher for beginners or not the best trade-off, but it doesn't have much to do with Javascript
- kaoD 9y ago
  I think it's just a case of leaky abstraction. I'd change the API to something like: robot.action = { action: 'jump' }; robot.action = { action: 'move', amount: 4 }; etc. Or if you want to keep the action creators: robot.action = robot.jump(); robot.action = robot.move(4); Which makes it obvious that there can only be a single action per loop call.
  - reacweb 9y ago
    Or the action could be the return value. IMHO, trying to guess the physical model by experimentation is painful. Why not propose a debug button to display the state of variables during the execution of script.
    - positivecomment 9y ago
      Exactly, the function should not be responsible to see if robot.action has any existing value. It should just return an action depending on the state.
  - always_good 9y ago
    Another idea is to return a map of actions. { jump: true, move: 4, shoot: true } Making the user increment a nonce and use the remainder operator just to do multiple actions simultaneously is pretty heavy.
- IanCal 9y ago
  That's not right. You can put more than one action in the loop. This slowly completes the level: function loop(robot){ // your code here robot.move(1) robot.jump() }
  - kaoD 9y ago
    It shouldn't according to its own instructions. I bet jump() has something like `if (robot.touchingFloor) { action = 'jump'; }` which makes your code work because it doesn't overwrite the robot action if it can't actually jump. Switch the order of actions and you'll see the robot never jumps because its action gets overwritten (as stated in the instructions tab). EDIT: Here it is: https://github.com/reaalkhalil/JSRobot/blob/478848147a080d8bf6ded8689d523337ea5e5ff7/scripts/Robot.js#L41 https://github.com/reaalkhalil/JSRobot/blob/478848147a080d8b...
    - IanCal 9y ago
      Ah I stand corrected, thanks. So I guess it's performing the last valid action.

by bjpirt 9y ago

always_good 9y ago

I don't understand. Are you referring to Level 2? What's going on there is just that the robot can only enqueue a single action for the tick. So calling multiple actions will just overwrite the slot. It's an implementation detail of the game. Maybe it's tougher for beginners or not the best trade-off, but it doesn't have much to do with Javascript

kaoD 9y ago
I think it's just a case of leaky abstraction. I'd change the API to something like: robot.action = { action: 'jump' }; robot.action = { action: 'move', amount: 4 }; etc. Or if you want to keep the action creators: robot.action = robot.jump(); robot.action = robot.move(4); Which makes it obvious that there can only be a single action per loop call.
- reacweb 9y ago
  Or the action could be the return value. IMHO, trying to guess the physical model by experimentation is painful. Why not propose a debug button to display the state of variables during the execution of script.
  - positivecomment 9y ago
    Exactly, the function should not be responsible to see if robot.action has any existing value. It should just return an action depending on the state.
- always_good 9y ago
  Another idea is to return a map of actions. { jump: true, move: 4, shoot: true } Making the user increment a nonce and use the remainder operator just to do multiple actions simultaneously is pretty heavy.
IanCal 9y ago
That's not right. You can put more than one action in the loop. This slowly completes the level: function loop(robot){ // your code here robot.move(1) robot.jump() }
- kaoD 9y ago
  It shouldn't according to its own instructions. I bet jump() has something like `if (robot.touchingFloor) { action = 'jump'; }` which makes your code work because it doesn't overwrite the robot action if it can't actually jump. Switch the order of actions and you'll see the robot never jumps because its action gets overwritten (as stated in the instructions tab). EDIT: Here it is: https://github.com/reaalkhalil/JSRobot/blob/478848147a080d8bf6ded8689d523337ea5e5ff7/scripts/Robot.js#L41 https://github.com/reaalkhalil/JSRobot/blob/478848147a080d8b...
  - IanCal 9y ago
    Ah I stand corrected, thanks. So I guess it's performing the last valid action.