下面的代码确实按照我需要的方式工作,但它很丑,过多或其他一些事情。我已经看了公式,并试图写一些解决方案,但我最终得到了类似数量的语句。

在这种情况下,是否有一种数学公式对我有益,或者是否可以接受16个if语句?

为了解释代码,这是一款基于同时回合制的游戏。两名玩家各有四个操作按钮,结果来自一个数组(0-3),但变量“1”和“2”可以赋值任何东西,如果这有帮助的话。结果是,0 =双方都不赢,1 = p1赢,2 = p2赢,3 =双方都赢。

public int fightMath(int one, int two) {

    if(one == 0 && two == 0) { result = 0; }
    else if(one == 0 && two == 1) { result = 0; }
    else if(one == 0 && two == 2) { result = 1; }
    else if(one == 0 && two == 3) { result = 2; }
    else if(one == 1 && two == 0) { result = 0; }
    else if(one == 1 && two == 1) { result = 0; }
    else if(one == 1 && two == 2) { result = 2; }
    else if(one == 1 && two == 3) { result = 1; }
    else if(one == 2 && two == 0) { result = 2; }
    else if(one == 2 && two == 1) { result = 1; }
    else if(one == 2 && two == 2) { result = 3; }
    else if(one == 2 && two == 3) { result = 3; }
    else if(one == 3 && two == 0) { result = 1; }
    else if(one == 3 && two == 1) { result = 2; }
    else if(one == 3 && two == 2) { result = 3; }
    else if(one == 3 && two == 3) { result = 3; }

    return result;
}

当前回答

一个好的观点是将规则定义为文本,这样你就可以更容易地推导出正确的公式。这是从laalto漂亮的数组表示中提取出来的:

{ 0, 0, 1, 2 },
{ 0, 0, 2, 1 },
{ 2, 1, 3, 3 },
{ 1, 2, 3, 3 }

这里我们有一些一般性的评论,但你应该用规则来描述它们:

if(one<2) // left half
{
    if(two<2) // upper left half
    {
        result = 0; //neither hits
    }
    else // lower left half
    {
        result = 1+(one+two)%2; //p2 hits if sum is even
    }
}
else // right half
{
    if(two<2) // upper right half
    {
        result = 1+(one+two+1)%2; //p1 hits if sum is even
    }
    else // lower right half
    {
        return 3; //both hit
    }
}

当然,您可以将其压缩为更少的代码,但理解您编写的代码而不是寻找紧凑的解决方案通常是一个好主意。

if((one<2)&&(two<2)) result = 0; //top left
else if((one>1)&&(two>1)) result = 3; //bottom right
else result = 1+(one+two+((one>1)?1:0))%2; //no idea what that means

对复杂的p1/p2点击的一些解释会很棒,看起来很有趣!

其他回答

我个人喜欢级联三元运算符:

int result = condition1
    ? result1
    : condition2
    ? result2
    : condition3
    ? result3
    : resultElse;

但在你的情况下,你可以使用:

final int[] result = new int[/*16*/] {
    0, 0, 1, 2,
    0, 0, 2, 1,
    2, 1, 3, 3,
    1, 2, 3, 3
};

public int fightMath(int one, int two) {
    return result[one*4 + two];
}

或者,你可以注意到比特的模式:

one   two   result

section 1: higher bits are equals =>
both result bits are equals to that higher bits

00    00    00
00    01    00
01    00    00
01    01    00
10    10    11
10    11    11
11    10    11
11    11    11

section 2: higher bits are different =>
lower result bit is inverse of lower bit of 'two'
higher result bit is lower bit of 'two'

00    10    01
00    11    10
01    10    10
01    11    01
10    00    10
10    01    01
11    00    01
11    01    10

所以你可以使用魔法:

int fightMath(int one, int two) {
    int b1 = one & 2, b2 = two & 2;
    if (b1 == b2)
        return b1 | (b1 >> 1);

    b1 = two & 1;

    return (b1 << 1) | (~b1);
}

相反,你可以这样做

   public int fightMath(int one, int two) {
    return Calculate(one,two)

    }


    private int Calculate(int one,int two){

    if (one==0){
        if(two==0){
     //return value}
    }else if (one==1){
   // return value as per condtiion
    }

    }

您可以使用一个开关大小写,而不是多个if

还要提到的是,因为你有两个变量,那么你必须合并这两个变量,以使用它们在开关

检查这个Java开关语句来处理两个变量?

如果你无法想出一个公式,你可以使用一个表格来描述有限的结果:

final int[][] result = new int[][] {
  { 0, 0, 1, 2 },
  { 0, 0, 2, 1 },
  { 2, 1, 3, 3 },
  { 1, 2, 3, 3 }
};
return result[one][two];

Other people have already suggested my initial idea, the matrix method, but in addition to consolidating the if statements you can avoid some of what you have by making sure the arguments supplied are in the expected range and by using in-place returns (some coding standards I've seen enforce one-point-of-exit for functions, but I've found that multiple returns are very useful for avoiding arrow coding and with the prevalence of exceptions in Java there's not much point in strictly enforcing such a rule anyway as any uncaught exception thrown inside the method is a possible point of exit anyway). Nesting switch statements is a possibility, but for the small range of values you're checking here I find if statements to be more compact and not likely to result in much of a performance difference, especially if your program is turn-based rather than real-time.

public int fightMath(int one, int two) {
    if (one > 3 || one < 0 || two > 3 || two < 0) {
        throw new IllegalArgumentException("Result is undefined for arguments outside the range [0, 3]");
    }

    if (one <= 1) {
        if (two <= 1) return 0;
        if (two - one == 2) return 1;
        return 2; // two can only be 3 here, no need for an explicit conditional
    }

    // one >= 2
    if (two >= 2) return 3;
    if (two == 1) return 1;
    return 2; // two can only be 0 here
}

由于部分输入->结果映射的不规则性,这最终会导致可读性较差。我更喜欢矩阵风格,因为它的简单性和你如何设置矩阵在视觉上有意义(尽管这在一定程度上受到我对Karnaugh地图的记忆的影响):

int[][] results = {{0, 0, 1, 2},
                   {0, 0, 2, 1},
                   {2, 1, 3, 3},
                   {2, 1, 3, 3}};

更新:鉴于您提到了阻塞/命中,这里对函数进行了更彻底的更改,将属性/属性保存枚举类型用于输入和结果,并对结果进行了一些修改以考虑阻塞,这应该会产生一个更可读的函数。

enum MoveType {
    ATTACK,
    BLOCK;
}

enum MoveHeight {
    HIGH,
    LOW;
}

enum Move {
    // Enum members can have properties/attributes/data members of their own
    ATTACK_HIGH(MoveType.ATTACK, MoveHeight.HIGH),
    ATTACK_LOW(MoveType.ATTACK, MoveHeight.LOW),
    BLOCK_HIGH(MoveType.BLOCK, MoveHeight.HIGH),
    BLOCK_LOW(MoveType.BLOCK, MoveHeight.LOW);

    public final MoveType type;
    public final MoveHeight height;

    private Move(MoveType type, MoveHeight height) {
        this.type = type;
        this.height = height;
    }

    /** Makes the attack checks later on simpler. */
    public boolean isAttack() {
        return this.type == MoveType.ATTACK;
    }
}

enum LandedHit {
    NEITHER,
    PLAYER_ONE,
    PLAYER_TWO,
    BOTH;
}

LandedHit fightMath(Move one, Move two) {
    // One is an attack, the other is a block
    if (one.type != two.type) {
        // attack at some height gets blocked by block at same height
        if (one.height == two.height) return LandedHit.NEITHER;

        // Either player 1 attacked or player 2 attacked; whoever did
        // lands a hit
        if (one.isAttack()) return LandedHit.PLAYER_ONE;
        return LandedHit.PLAYER_TWO;
    }

    // both attack
    if (one.isAttack()) return LandedHit.BOTH;

    // both block
    return LandedHit.NEITHER;
}

You don't even have to change the function itself if you want to add blocks/attacks of more heights, just the enums; adding additional types of moves will probably require modification of the function, though. Also, EnumSets might be more extensible than using extra enums as properties of the main enum, e.g. EnumSet<Move> attacks = EnumSet.of(Move.ATTACK_HIGH, Move.ATTACK_LOW, ...); and then attacks.contains(move) rather than move.type == MoveType.ATTACK, though using EnumSets will probably be slightly slower than direct equals checks.


对于一个成功的块产生一个计数器的情况,您可以替换if (one。height == 2 .height)返回LandedHit.NEITHER;与

if (one.height == two.height) {
    // Successful block results in a counter against the attacker
    if (one.isAttack()) return LandedHit.PLAYER_TWO;
    return LandedHit.PLAYER_ONE;
}

另外,使用三元运算符(boolean_expression ?result_if_true: result_if_false)可以使代码更紧凑(例如,前面块中的代码将变成return one.isAttack() ?LandedHit。PLAYER_TWO: LandedHit.PLAYER_ONE;),但这可能会导致更难阅读的一行代码,所以我不建议在更复杂的分支中使用它。