@cat & phantomotap... let me show a code which is 100 % perfect
when there exists a small code which is 100% perfect then why are you making 100% perfection an imaginary situation???Code:#include<iostream> int main() { std::cout<<"Hello World!!!"; }
@jim
that's my school computer you are expecting.....
my pc has modern C++ compiler and editor
Next move is to add more vertical-whitespace (imo), remove all the surplus comments that don't really add anything, stop using getch() when there are portable standard alternatives in this case.
Also if you want it to be really flawless you should probably work on your variable names and stop using C-style arrays. And then there's all the other issues that has been mentioned in this thread that you conveniently overlooked.
How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
@manasij7479
with what should i replace getch(),and system("cls")?
Is it?Originally Posted by Mukul Kumar
What if a person says three exclamation marks are bad and another says that you must have three exclamation marks?
@neo1
please explain which variable name should i work upon
Nothing.
A console program is generally not supposed to clear the screen.
Just remove them and you'll see that the output of your program is much more readable.
@manasij7479
1)well that took me into deep thinking
and i think if i write the file-name as "Hello World!!!"
then the one who needs exclamation will use it and the other one will not
2)please execute my code once!
Did.
My point still stands.
O_o@cat & phantomotap... let me show a code which is 100 % perfect
You don't have enough vertical space.
You have no spacing between operators and operands.
You are falling out of `main' without an explicit return.
You are using the reduced form of parameters to `main'.
You have no comma between "Hello" and "World".
You've used three exclamation marks.
You didn't output a newline which some terminal emulators expect.
You've used six spaces for indentation.
When you have fixed these, I could come back and complain again, and again, and again because as others have said "perfect" is a matter of opinion, and you will never, ever reach it because perfection is indeed an imaginary situation.
Soma
but it is running fine as expected in my pc!!!
the output is
(first it asks the number of overs)
(then name of batsman)
(then display each ball's info and after hitting any key the next ball is thrown and the info is updated)
BATSMAN#1
name : (name)
runs : (total runs made)
status : (status if out or not)
BOWLER
overs played : (played overs total)
maiden overs : (maiden overs)
runs given : (runs given this over)
wickets taken : (total wickets)
now the bowler throws the ball...
press enter to update the score board...
Last edited by Mukul Kumar; 05-15-2013 at 12:37 PM.
@phantomotap
oh k got it
so you are talking about in context on a group of users!!!
but i m talking for a single person
then i agree in (100=(1/∞))% cases the situation is inpossible(and i consider that 1/∞ is a definite small number)
EDIT:
but my thread's topis is not 100% perfect program its flawless programming
like
if i make a pot of clay and which is flawless
someone asks that why is this thinner from base?
and second one asks why is it not thicker from top?
the pot is still useful and fully functional + have no defects
but don't meet different people's requirements
so i want to make that kind of pot(you know what i mean i.e. code)
Last edited by Mukul Kumar; 05-15-2013 at 12:50 PM.
O_o
If you aren't shooting for "flawless" as interpreted by others, a "group of users", why are you here?
Why are you working to improve your code to fit canonical models, like removing/reducing global variables, if you aren't shooting for quality as interpreted by the norm?
So, yeah, I am talking about the context of others; you are also talking about "flawless" and "perfection" in the context of how others interpret such things; if you were not, you'd have just defined your existing code as flawless.
Soma
"quality" thats what i need in my program and that program i call it flawless!!!
am i right?
now i will go to sleep and will attend this debate 18-20 hrs later(after daily routine)
About what? A program that meets expectations is not flawless, it just meets expectations.
I'm somewhat fearful of what happens next. This thread could go on for weeks, just because "flawless" is how you want us to judge it. It's not really worth it to me -- we really only get a sentence or two from you, plus a code dump. You're barely thinking about how your program can be better on your own, so I feel like you literally have nothing to talk about. You just want to follow orders.
You sleep all day?now i will go to sleep and will attend this debate 18-20 hrs later(after daily routine)
Last edited by whiteflags; 05-15-2013 at 01:25 PM.
