Sorry I could not help laughing throughout your post. The only thing I have to disagree with is changing Choice to a nullable type too much nullable type casting. Explain why Game_Info should be a class and why rock,paper,scissor variables should be taken out. As for how I will read my code in a few months from now... I am sure it's simple enough for me to figure out what it does.

The variables are just redundant, they add an unneeded layer of indirection vs. using the plain enum values. Game_Info being a mutable struct defies all best practices about value types, and ignoring that will inevitably come and bite you somewhere, some day. As for the nullable, it's semantically what's right to do (absence of a meaningful value is a null value, not some "special" valid value), and the worries about too much casting are injustified, since Nullable<T> has implicit conversion to T, so there's no need to explicitly cast anything. Welcome to CR, glad you enjoyed!

@Mat'sMug can you please show me your casting? cause i seriously had to cast about 9 things right now i am firm believer of your words Mat.

@funTertain say you have a Selection? selection, instead of casting, you use selection.Value, and instead of comparing to null, you use selection.HasValue. And you can compare selection == Selection.Rock without casting, and assign selection = Selection.Scissors without casting either.

I don't get it and should i use pascal case or camel case for methods?

Those are really just stylistic guidelines, what matters most is consistency, but most C# devs will expect camelCase to be only used for locals/parameters and instance fields. Notice the PascalCase casing for methods throughout the .NET framework?

hi!

hi

I can't change things to nullable without a massive overhaul

how so?

string playerChoice = Console.ReadLine().Trim();

you know, if your input is "invalid", you have a valid "invalid" input...

bool validEntry = Enum.TryParse(playerChoice, out element);

i changed everything to nullable and then it expected me to change the inherited field "wins" to nullable and i was like wuuuuuuuut!?

i should say derived field "wins"

public fields are sloppy

fields should be private... always

why?

i never understood this

aren't public properties with just {get;set;} the same thing as a public field?

brewing some tea

no. they're the same thing as a getter+setter methods, backed by a private field

also:

i will try

lol the C# terminologies are too advanced for me so i almost always end up just skimming through posts without getting any type of info whatsoever.

I often find myself googling big words i never hear in society today.

anyways....

back to the nullable thing

let me link the code with all the nullables in it

i am telling you its too much

already up to 3

I'm not following. I didn't say make everything nullable ...just that Choice method should return a nullable type

yes doing so everything becomes super PARANOID

    public override R_P_S? Choice()
    {

        R_P_S element;
        string playerChoice = Console.ReadLine().Trim();
        bool validEntry = Enum.TryParse(playerChoice, out element);

            if (!validEntry)
            {
                return null;
            }
          return element;
       }

^^ that's all

i swear it's like Ebola up in this code

yes that's what i'm saying

since i don't know anyway to set a enum type to nullable

i have to go into the code

and set playerChoice and computerChoice to null

after that

i had to set the local parameter of player inside DetermineWinner

public override R_P_S? Choice()  //Override the abstract method Choice inside the Participant class
{
    R_P_S element;
    element = (R_P_S)rand.Next(1,Enum.GetNames(typeof(R_P_S)).Length);
    return element;
}

to null

and then...

nope

i don't even know what is wrong with wins

i am telling you these guys are paranoid man

    R_P_S? computerChoice;
    R_P_S? playerChoice;

yes

i have to do that

and then i have to set the parameter player to null too

why?

why did you set computer to nullable?

idk

because hmmm

because that's your return type... the base class says Choice() returns a R_P_S?, won't compile otherwise

        Console.WriteLine("Player: " + playerChoice.Value);
        Console.WriteLine("\n" + "Computer: " + computerChoice.Value);

^^ when you know you have non-null values, just get them here

let me post you the new script

lol

i have new variable and function names

so it gets crazy

determineWinner doesn't need to take nullables if you've validated the user input before

oh, but determineWinner is validating the user input....

you see, your code does need a major overhaul.

that method is making the Single Responsibility Principle take a serious beating

pastebin.com/jzpt65i6

If i got your point maybe i will be able to see that but i can't see it

did you actually run this in VS?

nope

wow

real nice of you

T_T

you're probably thinking "man 14 yr olds are weird"

not all of 'em ;-)

I know a few regulars on this site that are your age

I am the exception hue hue hue

You watch anime?

like one piece

no time for that :/

Do you like the new names i chose for the methods and variables?

it's much better, yes

I cloned it, hold on..

pfft i don't know where "much" better stands on your chart

but it could be like like a 0.1111% increase in quality

lol

abstract class Participant   //Abstract - no need for instances, Many common functionality
    {
        public int wins;
        float winRate;

        public void DisplayWinRate()
        {
            winRate = ((float)wins / Game_Info.gamesPlayed) * 100;  //Win rate percentage

            string _winRate = String.Format("win rate: {0}%", winRate.ToString());
            Console.WriteLine(_winRate.PadLeft(0));
        }

        public abstract Selection? ChooseSelection();   //Every participant needs to have a choice. No choice about that TROLLOLOLOL

there

shouldn't need any more nullables than that

hold on my inexperienced eyes are still trying to figure out the differences

Let me put my coding glasses on

nah i think i need coding binoculars

Selection? is shorthand notation for Nullable<Selection>

I removed the Invalid enum member, and made ChooseSelection return a Selection?

the computer participant will never return a null, but an invalid input from the Player will.

then, I didn't want to change your logic, so where you print the selections after the tie-breaking loop...

Console.WriteLine("Player: " + playerSelect ?? "(invalid selection)");

I null-coalesced the player's selection into a valid string

Is there really... a need for computerChoice to be a nullable dude?

the compiler requires it

wow

as far as the compiler is concerned, the signature for ChooseSelection - the "contract" if you will, stipulates that the return type is a Nullable<Selection>... for all derived types, regardless of the implementation details.

lol

i just removed it and it worked

the fact that the computer player isn't ever returning a null, is an implementation detail

what's a "implementation detail" my inexperienced ears can't understand

sheesh... the nuances of sentences are overwhelming

@funTertain oh you meant the parameter in the DetermineWinner method... I thought you meant the ChooseSelection

i changed everything that had to do with computer giving a null value

even ChooseSelection

I hope my bad coding practices don't override how your brain functions ....

@funTertain I'm not following that part - so now the computer is returning null all the time?

nvm

shouldve tested

the run failed for me

wait

oh i see

because ChooseSelection is abstract i am forced to implement

null

yes

wow

that's how abstract members work

ik that

it just slipped out of my mind for a sec

k

i have not focused on that part of the code for awhile that's all

now, the DetermineWinner logic needs a major cleanup

i almost feel like

is it the structure????

determining the winner should be a function that returns one of the two players involved, no?

it almost feels like the other option of having a invalid option inside my enum was wise

it does not return

hence it's void

it's about to hit 12:00 am

anyway, sleep on it - imagine what the logic would look like (pursuing that way) if you implemented Rock-Paper-Scissors-Lizard-Spock-Spiderman-Batman-Wizard-Glock ;-)

so don't

take out the nulls

it's not the nulls, it's the structure of the method.

well

no

because it's the implementation

that forces me to have to make computer a nullable also

and that shouldn't be a problem at all

ChosenSelection to be exact

goin to bed

'night

anything to say?

i want you opinion on this

or tormorrow we have breakfast over it

bye

take a look at this when you have a chance:

ok

(and the answers, too)

Ok so i casted the Selection? to Selection is this a good solution?

hello