Keep/Drop Function #92

Manually merged
kg333 merged 12 commits from kg333/tenebrous-dicebot:keep_drop_function into master 2021-09-26 14:05:57 +00:00
2 changed files with 20 additions and 15 deletions
Showing only changes of commit 2654887d8c - Show all commits

View File

@ -12,17 +12,22 @@ use std::ops::{Deref, DerefMut};
pub struct Dice {
pub(crate) count: u32,
pub(crate) sides: u32,
pub(crate) keep: u32,
}
impl fmt::Display for Dice {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
if self.keep == self. count {
write!(f, "{}d{}", self.count, self.sides)
kg333 marked this conversation as resolved Outdated

Since you have if-else clauses here, it might make more sense to have a third enum member in addition to Keep and Drop, which indicates that we do nothing special with the roll.

Since you have if-else clauses here, it might make more sense to have a third enum member in addition to Keep and Drop, which indicates that we do nothing special with the roll.
Outdated
Review

Added another enum member called None and it's much cleaner. Although members with no type give my C-programmer soul the heebie-jeebies.

Added another enum member called None and it's much cleaner. Although members with no type give my C-programmer soul the heebie-jeebies.
} else {
write!(f, "{}d{}k{}", self.count, self.sides, self.keep)
}
}
}
impl Dice {
pub fn new(count: u32, sides: u32) -> Dice {
Dice { count, sides }
pub fn new(count: u32, sides: u32, keep: u32) -> Dice {
Dice { count, sides, keep }
}
}

View File

@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ fn parse_dice(input: &str) -> IResult<&str, Dice> {
let (input, (count, _, sides)) = tuple((digit1, tag("d"), digit1))(input)?;
Ok((
input,
Dice::new(count.parse().unwrap(), sides.parse().unwrap()),
Dice::new(count.parse().unwrap(), sides.parse().unwrap(), count.parse().unwrap()),
kg333 marked this conversation as resolved Outdated

I think it is better to document what the keep expression actually is here, so tacking on "1dXkY" would be useful.

And since pattern matches are expressions, I think we can rewrite these two match blocks. Something like this:

let (keep, input) = match tuple::<&str, _, (_, _), _>((tag("k"), digit1))(input) {
    // if ok, keep expression is present
    Ok(r) => (r.0, r.1.1),
    // otherwise absent and keep all dice
    Err(_) => ("".to_string(), count)
};

The same should be doable for the drop expression. I think this way you can also get rid of the mut on input, because let in rust is not just a variable assignment. It actually creates a whole new variable binding.

Note: I haven't tested the above, but it should work. Or some variation of it should work.

I think it is better to document what the keep expression actually is here, so tacking on "1dXkY" would be useful. And since pattern matches are expressions, I think we can rewrite these two match blocks. Something like this: ```rust let (keep, input) = match tuple::<&str, _, (_, _), _>((tag("k"), digit1))(input) { // if ok, keep expression is present Ok(r) => (r.0, r.1.1), // otherwise absent and keep all dice Err(_) => ("".to_string(), count) }; ``` The same should be doable for the drop expression. I think this way you can also get rid of the `mut` on input, because `let` in rust is not just a variable assignment. It actually creates a whole new variable binding. Note: I haven't tested the above, but it should work. Or some variation of it should work.
))
}
kg333 marked this conversation as resolved Outdated

Rust supports tuple destructuring in pattern matching, which may be useful here and the other match:

Ok((rest, (_, keep_amount)) => ...

rest being the rest of the input in this case.

Rust supports tuple destructuring in pattern matching, which may be useful here and the other match: ```rust Ok((rest, (_, keep_amount)) => ... ``` `rest` being the rest of the input in this case.
Outdated
Review

Ooh, that's much more human-readable, thanks!

Ooh, that's much more human-readable, thanks!
@ -108,16 +108,16 @@ mod tests {
use super::*;
#[test]
fn dice_test() {
assert_eq!(parse_dice("2d4"), Ok(("", Dice::new(2, 4))));
assert_eq!(parse_dice("20d40"), Ok(("", Dice::new(20, 40))));
assert_eq!(parse_dice("8d7"), Ok(("", Dice::new(8, 7))));
assert_eq!(parse_dice("2d4"), Ok(("", Dice::new(2, 4, 2))));
assert_eq!(parse_dice("20d40"), Ok(("", Dice::new(20, 40, 20))));
assert_eq!(parse_dice("8d7"), Ok(("", Dice::new(8, 7, 8))));
}
#[test]
fn element_test() {
assert_eq!(
parse_element(" \t\n\r\n 8d7 \n"),
Ok((" \n", Element::Dice(Dice::new(8, 7))))
Ok((" \n", Element::Dice(Dice::new(8, 7, 8))))
);
assert_eq!(
parse_element(" \t\n\r\n 8 \n"),
@ -139,14 +139,14 @@ mod tests {
parse_signed_element(" \t\n\r\n- 8d4 \n"),
Ok((
" \n",
SignedElement::Negative(Element::Dice(Dice::new(8, 4)))
SignedElement::Negative(Element::Dice(Dice::new(8, 4, 8)))
))
);
assert_eq!(
parse_signed_element(" \t\n\r\n+ 8d4 \n"),
Ok((
" \n",
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(8, 4)))
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(8, 4, 8)))
))
);
}
@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ mod tests {
Ok((
"",
ElementExpression(vec![SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(
8, 4
8, 4, 8
)))])
))
);
@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ mod tests {
Ok((
" \n ",
ElementExpression(vec![SignedElement::Negative(Element::Dice(Dice::new(
8, 4
8, 4, 8
)))])
))
);
@ -176,11 +176,11 @@ mod tests {
Ok((
" 1d5 ",
ElementExpression(vec![
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(3, 4))),
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(3, 4, 3))),
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Bonus(7)),
SignedElement::Negative(Element::Bonus(5)),
SignedElement::Negative(Element::Dice(Dice::new(6, 12))),
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(1, 1))),
SignedElement::Negative(Element::Dice(Dice::new(6, 12, 6))),
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Dice(Dice::new(1, 1, 1))),
SignedElement::Positive(Element::Bonus(53)),
])
))