I've got this 3 x 3 array of char that's supposed to represent a tic-tac-toe board, and before, I would use a bunch of "if" statements to see if there were 3 in a row.
... if ((board[0][0] == board[0][1]) && (board[0][1] == board[0][2])) { 开发者_如何学Go ... } ...
I realized that this is a lot of typing, and quite error-prone, so is there a better way to do this?
You could change it to check from only where the last move was made.
//lr = lastMoveRow
//lc = lastMoveCol
// no need to check blank with last move known
if (board[0][lc] == board[1][lc] && board[0][lc] == board[2][lc] ||
board[lr][0] == board[lr][1] && board[lr][0] == board[lr][2]){
// Game over
}
// Check diagonals
if (board[1][1] != blank &&
(board[0][0] == board[1][1] && board[0][0] == board[2][2] ||
board[2][0] == board[1][1] && board[2][0] == board[0][2])){
// Game over
}
Or - Checking all states:
//Check horizontals and verticals at once
for (int i = 0; i < 3; ++i){
// Check column and row at once
if (board[0][i] != blank && board[0][i] == board[1][i] && board[0][i] == board[2][i] ||
board[i][0] != blank && board[i][0] == board[i][1] && board[i][0] == board[i][2]){
// Game over
}
}
// Check diagonals
if (board[1][1] != blank &&
(board[0][0] == board[1][1] && board[0][0] == board[2][2] ||
board[2][0] == board[1][1] && board[2][0] == board[0][2])){
// Game over
}
Or if you do turn it into a bit by bit system - keep separate X and O boards for ease of updating. Then you only need 9 bits for x, 9 bits for O, and your winning boards matches are much simpler. (To find open spaces in this case, just bitwise or the x and o boards)
// winning 9 bit boards
// int winningBoards[8]
000000111
000111000
111000000
001001001
010010010
100100100
100010001
001010100
//xBoard and yBoard can be ints
for (int i = 0; i < 8; ++i){
if (xBoard & winningBoards[i] == winningBoards[i]){
//Game over
}
}
You can remove the paranthesis because &&
has lower priority than ==
if (board[0][0] == board[0][1] && board[0][1] == board[0][2])
You can also define an inline function (or macro) to factor out equality
inline bool are_equal(int a, int b, int c) {
return a == b && b == c;
}
...
if (are_equal(board[0][0], board[0][1], board[0][2]))
Note that a==b==c
does not return what you need. For instance, 0==0==1
is true in many C-derived languages.
You could loop it. For instance to check all of the rows you might do:
for(int i = 0; i < 3; i++){
if((board[i][0]==board[i][1]) && (board[i][1]==board[i][2])){
....
}
}
And do something similar for the columns. Then you just need to check the diagonals separately.
I don't know about "better", but you could break things up serially:
//Set empty to whatever value you're using for an empty square.
#define empty '\0'
bool thereIsALine(char matrix[3][3])
{
char c;
//Check all columns:
for(int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
{
c = matrix[i][0];
if (c == empty)
break;
if (c == matrix[i][1] && c == matrix[i][2])
return true;
}
//Check all rows:
for(int i = 0; i < 3; i++)
{
c = matrix[0][i];
if (c == empty)
break;
if (c == matrix[1][i] && c == matrix[2][i])
return true;
}
//Check diagonals
c = matrix[1][1];
if (c == empty) return false;
if (c == matrix[0][2] && c == matrix[2][0] )
return true;
if (c == matrix[0][0] && c == matrix[2][2] )
return true;
return false;
}
Adapted from last week's Code Golf competition. Note that linear patterns along the board matrix begin at a given index and progress along equal intervals.
And if you represent player 1 with a 1, and player 2 with a 2, then those are independent bits and you can test for 3 in a row with bitwise AND.
char check_1row( char *board, int base, int stride ) {
return board[ base ] & board[ base + stride ] & board[ base + 2 * stride ];
}
char check_win( char (&board)[3][3] ) {
char winner = 0;
winner |= check1row( board, 0, 4 ); // check NW/SE diagonal
for ( int i = 0; i < 3; i ++ ) {
winner |= check1row( board, i, 3 ); // check verticals
}
winner |= check1row( board, 2, 2 ); // check NE/SW diagonal
for ( int i = 0; i < 9; i += 3 ) {
winner |= check1row( board, i, 1 ); // check horizontals
}
return winner;
}
Yes, you could do this
if (board[0][0]==board[0][1]==board[0][2]) {...}
Maybe even write a function
inline boolean row_win(int row_num){
return (board[row_num][0]==board[row_num][1]==board[row_num][2]);
}
It has a hidden side though, it wont work if board[0][0],board[0][0],board[0][1] are equal to 0.
An alternative is writing a for loop, but I guess thats even more typing.
You can store the indices that make up winning rows, and use a single loop:
int win_row[][3] = {{0, 0, 0}, {1, 1, 1}, {2, 2, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2}};
int win_col[][3] = {{0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {0, 0, 0}, {1, 1, 1}, {2, 2, 2}, {0, 1, 2}, {2, 1, 0}};
bool has_winner(char board[][3])
{
//'\0' means unoccupied
for (int i = 0; i != 8; ++i) {
char c = board[win_row[i][0]][win_col[i][0]];
if (c && c == board[win_row[i][1]][win_col[i][1]] && c == board[win_row[i][2]][win_col[i][2]]) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
I also support Jeff's suggestions of storing players' moves in separate values and using bitwise operations.
Here is a complete solution, in the form of a check function that verifies if a player (1 or 2, standing for X and O) wins:
// tic tac toe win checker
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
const int DIM = 3;
int check (int t[DIM][DIM]) {
// 0 is empty, 1 is X, 2 is O
// return 1 or 2 if there is a win from either
for (int row=0; row<DIM; row++) {
if (t[row][0] == t[row][1] && t[row][1] == t[row][2]) {
if (t[row][0] != 0) return t[row][0];
}
}
for (int col=0; col<DIM; col++) {
if (t[0][col] == t[1][col] && t[0][col] == t[2][col]) {
if (t[0][col] != 0) return t[0][col];
}
}
if (t[0][0] == t[1][1] && t[1][1] == t[2][2]) {
if (t[0][0] != 0) return t[0][0];
}
if (t[0][2] == t[1][1] && t[1][1] == t[2][0] != 0) {
if (t[0][2] != 0) return t[0][2];
}
return 1;
}
int main() {
int ttt[DIM][DIM];
ttt[1][0] = 2; // Initialyzing row no. 2 to values "2" to test
ttt[1][1] = 2;
ttt[1][2] = 2;
if (check(ttt) != 0) {
cout << "Player " << check(ttt) << " wins\n";
}
else {
cout << "No winner yet\n";
}
}
EDIT: I have preferred this approach (returning the number of the winning player) rather than simply verifying if there was a winner, as it seemed more practical for use.
Hope it helps!
精彩评论