Prev: Ruby Basic
Next: Ruby Basic
From: Lars Haugseth on 24 Jun 2010 20:05
Here's a quick solution visualized using Rubygame¹:

http://www.pastie.org/1018079

I'm sorry about the lack of comments (the code should
be mostly self-explanatory, if not just ask.)

--
Lars Haugseth

[1] http://rubygame.org/
From: Lars Haugseth on 24 Jun 2010 20:09
* Benoit Daloze <eregontp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I had an intuition doing some Math.sqrt about the distance, and it
> revealed to be exact :)

I bet you didn't do that right from the start, before seeing the
first results? At least I didn't. :-)

--
Lars Haugseth
From: Benoit Daloze on 25 Jun 2010 06:57
On 24 June 2010 21:24, Yaser Sulaiman <yaserbuntu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> [...] although I have to admit that
> talking about generating random vectors sounds "cooler" :P
Yes, and a Point + Point is not as meaningful

> Because I'm not using Vectors anymore, Point + Point now performs
> the equivalent 2D translation. Also, Point.distance_to now uses Math.hypot.

Cool, but I believe your implementation of Point#+ is somehow bad,
because it returns @y.
So you probably want to return self if you accept the Point objects to
be mutable,
or create a new Point, which is a bit safer, but creates a new object
(in both cases you could definitely get rid of this awful "return p" :) )

Also, @@origin should not be modified, and then should be a constant,
and be #freeze if you want Point to be mutable.

On 25 June 2010 03:05, Lars Haugseth <njus(a)larshaugseth.com> wrote:
> * Benoit Daloze <eregontp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I had an intuition doing some Math.sqrt about the distance, and it
>> revealed to be exact :)
>
> I bet you didn't do that right from the start, before seeing the
> first results? At least I didn't. :-)
> --
> Lars Haugseth

I thought while writing it (without sqrt) that it was going wrong, and
the next day I thought to sqrt.
The night is a good adviser :-)

B.D.

From: Yaser Sulaiman on 25 Jun 2010 09:30
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Benoit Daloze <eregontp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> Cool, but I believe your implementation of Point#+ is somehow bad,
> because it returns @y.
> So you probably want to return self if you accept the Point objects to
> be mutable,
> or create a new Point, which is a bit safer, but creates a new object
> (in both cases you could definitely get rid of this awful "return p" :) )
>
>
The _awful_ "return p" is now gone ;)
I want Point objects to be mutable, so Point#+ returns self
after modifying the x and y coordinates.



> Also, @@origin should not be modified, and then should be a constant,
> and be #freeze if you want Point to be mutable.


Good point. The origin is now a "frozen" class constant.

From: timr on 27 Jun 2010 01:22
A thorough derivation of the distribution frequency transformation for
the case of a circle. Behold the power of math!
http://excitemike.com/Random_Numbers_and_Probability_Density_Functions
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Ruby Basic
Next: Ruby Basic