The Quest for Tetris... Part 2
Author
Hello all,
Continuing from part 1, I have even more problems with my code. (Ok, so only one right now, but I'm pretty sure that it's messing everything else up)
PROBLEM 3: My line-removing code doesn't work correctly. It funks out and makes weird patterns. So I'm placing the brick and then it cleared all the lines on top. Then I placed it again and it made weird lines which went away when my brick hit it.
Many thanks in advance for the help.
adam_o
UPDATED CODE
EDIT 1: Updated code, updated Problem 3.
[Edited by - adam_o on June 9, 2007 9:02:31 PM]
Author
Quote:Original post by Ravuya
Sounds like an off-by-one error. Remember that C++ arrays start at 0 and go to n-1.
I don't think it's off-by-one, because that kicks up the debugger... I had that happen between Problem 2 and Problem 3, but I was able to get the help on that one... nice try...
Quote:Original post by adam_oQuote:Original post by Ravuya
Sounds like an off-by-one error. Remember that C++ arrays start at 0 and go to n-1.
I don't think it's off-by-one, because that kicks up the debugger... I had that happen between Problem 2 and Problem 3, but I was able to get the help on that one... nice try...
Not quite. Off-by-one errors are simply miscalculations of location by one, because you forgot to compensate for a starting point or such. First, this is not guaranteed to cause an error, if you overrun an array, so it may or may not crash/invoke debugging. This is not something you can rely on. Second, the off-by-one error may not even be causing you to overrun the array, which would not even generate a potential for an overrun, so a crash/debug wouldn't even happen. It is merely a logic off-by-one.
If you're code is removing a line above the one you want to remove, you probably do, in fact, have an off-by-one error. Check you're code for calculating which row to remove. In a C++ array, the second item is index 1.
I looked at your code and I'm not sure where the problem is, but I wanted to say 3 things:
1) You should create helper functions that operate on a whole row (check if it's full, clear it, ...). This will make functions like check_clear_row() much cleaner (and less error-prone!).
2) In the loop, why is the first index of the array always 0 on the right?
3) Why did you choose to have the the array as -
arr_tetris_screen[Width][Height]? Arrays are row major so switching between the width and the height will make the code more intuitive.
These are just quick suggestions, sorry if I misunderstood your code (regarding 2 and 3).
1) You should create helper functions that operate on a whole row (check if it's full, clear it, ...). This will make functions like check_clear_row() much cleaner (and less error-prone!).
2) In the loop, why is the first index of the array always 0 on the right?
3) Why did you choose to have the the array as -
arr_tetris_screen[Width][Height]? Arrays are row major so switching between the width and the height will make the code more intuitive.
These are just quick suggestions, sorry if I misunderstood your code (regarding 2 and 3).
Author
Quote:Original post by Daishim
Not quite. Off-by-one errors are simply miscalculations of location by one, because you forgot to compensate for a starting point or such. First, this is not guaranteed to cause an error, if you overrun an array, so it may or may not crash/invoke debugging. This is not something you can rely on. Second, the off-by-one error may not even be causing you to overrun the array, which would not even generate a potential for an overrun, so a crash/debug wouldn't even happen. It is merely a logic off-by-one.
If you're code is removing a line above the one you want to remove, you probably do, in fact, have an off-by-one error. Check you're code for calculating which row to remove. In a C++ array, the second item is index 1.
I understand this. It doesn't just remove the line above though, it removes every line.
Quote:Original post by Gage64
I looked at your code and I'm not sure where the problem is, but I wanted to say 3 things:
1) You should create helper functions that operate on a whole row (check if it's full, clear it, ...). This will make functions like check_clear_row() much cleaner (and less error-prone!).
That sounds good. I'll add that to the code.
Quote:
2) In the loop, why is the first index of the array always 0 on the right?
The first one of the set is always 0, because that's the first one I decided to remove. I didn't really decide to do it in any particular order, just that it's easier if I just do it from low to high to remember. I didn't entirely understand the question, so that's what I hope you're asking.
Quote:
3) Why did you choose to have the the array as -
arr_tetris_screen[Width][Height]? Arrays are row major so switching between the width and the height will make the code more intuitive.
I didn't know! Interesting... I guess width by height is just easier for me, because that way it goes along with the (x,y) coordinate system. It's just the way I tought myself, I guess.
Author
Ok, so I'm really confused about what to do... could somebody show what some pseudocode for clearing lines would look like?
I'm not sure if this will work, but try it anyways.
void check_clear_row(){ int row; // Scan through all the rows for(row = 0; row < SCREENH - 1; row++) { int i; BOOL isFull = TRUE; // Does this row need to be cleared? for(i = 0; i < 8; i++) { if(arr_tetris_screen[row] == NO_TILE) isFull = FALSE; } // Clear row if(isFull) { int currow; // Scan through all rows above this one, starting from this one. for(currow = row; currow > 0; currow--) { // Replace this row by the one right above it for(i = 0; i < 8; i++) { arr_tetris_screen[currow] = arr_tetris_screen[currow - 1]; } } } } translate();}
Author
Quote:Original post by AcePilot
I'm not sure if this will work, but try it anyways.
*** Source Snippet Removed ***
It didn't work, thanks for trying. I located the spot in the code where the code whas wrong- and it was an off by one code error. WHOOPS! LOL New code attached, looking for new problems.
Author
I found a new problem... see above, I wrote a ton on it... dangit I thought it worked, but aparently, it didn't.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
