I've been trying to figure this out for HOURS and can't get it to work.
This is what I have in appirater.m:
static NSString *_appId = #"999999";
static double _daysUntilPrompt = 0;
static NSInteger _usesUntilPrompt = 1;
static NSInteger _significantEventsUntilPrompt = 10;
static double _timeBeforeReminding = 1;
I have a simple game and I want the appirater to come on specifically at level 10.
I would very much appreciate any help! Thanks!
First set the number:
[Appirater setSignificantEventsUntilPrompt:10];
After you call the method below, the number of significant will increment by 1, and when meet the significant event count, it will prompt the dialog.
[Appirater userDidSignificantEvent:YES]
significantEventsUntilPrompt:
after how many significant events user performed (Significant events can be like - completed a level in game, achieved/unlocked some thing etc). You can tell Appirater that user has performed significant event by [Appirater userDidSignificantEvent:YES]
Related
The goal of this post is to find a more efficient way to create this method. Right now, as I start adding more and more values, I'm going to have a very messy and confusing app. Any help is appreciated!
I am making a workout app and assign an integer value to each workout. For example:
Where the number is exersiceInt:
01 is High Knees
02 is Jumping Jacks
03 is Jog in Place
etc.
I am making it so there is a feature to randomize the workout. To do this I am using this code:
-(IBAction) setWorkoutIntervals {
exerciseInt01 = 1 + (rand() %3);
exerciseInt02 = 1 + (rand() %3);
exerciseInt03 = 1 + (rand() %3);
}
So basically the workout intervals will first be a random workout (between high knees, jumping jacks, and jog in place). What I want to do is make a universal that defines the following so I don't have to continuously hard code everything.
Right now I have:
-(void) setLabelText {
if (exerciseInt01 == 1) {
exercise01Label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"High Knees"];
}
if (exerciseInt01 == 2) {
exercise01Label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Jumping Jacks"];
}
if (exerciseInt01 == 3) {
exercise01Label.text = [NSString stringWithFormat:#"Jog in Place"];
}
}
I can already tell this about to get really messy once I start specifying images for each workout and start adding workouts. Additionally, my plan was to put the same code for exercise02Label, exercise03Label, etc. which would become extremely redundant and probably unnecessary.
What I'm thinking would be perfect if there would be someway to say
exercise01Label.text = exercise01Int; (I want to to say that the Label's text equals Jumping Jacks based on the current integer value)
How can I make it so I only have to state everything once and make the code less messy and less lengthy?
Three things for you to explore to make your code easier:
1. Count from zero
A number of things can be easier if you count from zero. A simple example is if your first exercise was numbered 0 then your random calculation would just be rand() % 3 (BTW look up uniform random number, there are much better ways to get a random number).
2. Learn about enumerations
An enumeration is a type with a set of named literal values. In (Objective-)C you can also think of them as just a collection of named integer values. For example you might declare:
typedef enum
{
HighKnees,
JumpingJacks,
JogInPlace,
ExerciseKindCount
} ExerciseCount;
Which declares ExerciseCount as a new type with 4 values. Each of these is equivalent to an integer, here HighKnees is equivalent to 0 and ExerciseKindCount to 3 - this should make you think of the first thing, count from zero...
3. Discover arrays
An array is an ordered collection of items where each item has an index - which is usually an integer or enumeration value. In (Objective-)C there are two basic kinds of arrays: C-style and object-style represented by NSArray and NSMutableArray. For example here is a simple C-style array:
NSString *gExerciseLabels[ExerciseKindCount] =
{ #"High Knees",
#"Jumping Jacks",
#"Jog in Place"
}
You've probably guessed by now, the first item of the above array has index 0, back to counting from zero...
Exploring these three things should quickly show you ways to simplify your code. Later you may wish to explore structures and objects.
HTH
A simple way to start is by putting the exercise names in an array. Then you can access the names by index. eg - exerciseNames[exerciseNumber]. You can also make the list of exercises in an array (of integers). So you would get; exerciseNames[exerciseTable[i]]; for example. Eventually you will want an object to define an exercise so that you can include images, videos, counts, durations etc.
This question already has answers here:
Closed 10 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
why do i always get the same sequence of random numbers with rand()?
I am confounded by the fact that even using different programs (on the same machine) to run /compile, and after nilling the vaues (before and after) the function.. that NO MATTER WHAT.. I'll keep getting the SAME "random" numbers… each and every time I run it. I swear this is NOT how it's supposed to work.. I'm going to illustrate as simply as is possible…
#import <Foundation/Foundation.h>
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int rPrimitive = 0; rPrimitive = 1 + rand() % 50;
NSNumber *rObject = nil; rObject = [NSNumber numberWithInt:rand() % 10];
NSLog(#"%i %#", rPrimitive, rObject);
rPrimitive = 0; rObject = nil;
NSLog(#"%i %#", rPrimitive, rObject);
return 0;
}
Run it in TextMate:
i686-apple-darwin11-llvm-gcc-4.2
8 9
0 (null)
Run it in CodeRunner:
i686-apple-darwin11-llvm-gcc-4.2
8 9
0 (null)
Run it a million times, if you'd like. You can gues what it will always be. Why does this happen? Why oh why is this "how it is"?
This is why (from the rand man page):
If no seed value is provided, the rand() function is automatically
seeded with a value of 1.
Since it is always seeded with the same number it will always produce the same sequence of numbers. To get it to produce a different sequence each time it runs, you need to use a different seed each time it runs. You can use srand() to set the seed.
Because the numbers aren't random, they're pseudorandom. They're generated according to an algorithm which will always produce the same output, given the same initial seed. You're not seeding the PRNG, so it uses a default, constant seed.
If you seed the PRNG using something less predictable (such as the current time and/or PID), you will get different results each time. In the case of rand(3), you need to seed it with srand(3).
The reason it is like that is because rand is a pseudo-random-number-generator, meaning it doesn't generate true random numbers (which is actually a very difficult thing to do). It generates the next number in the sequence using the “seed”, and at the start of execution the seed is always set to the same value (1 or so), so if you don't change the seed, you'll always get the same sequence of random numbers. You can use something like srand(time(NULL)); to seed the random number generator based on the time, or you can use a random number generator that is considered strong enough for cryptographic purposes, arc4random.
You might thing “why is it like this?”, but there are some cases where you want to generate the same series of “random numbers” multiple times.
I have an app that have a lot of records that i am loading into a core data DB. The actual loading is done in a module called "loadDBRecords". This module is called from "MainViewController", which is connected to "MainViewController.xib".
As the loading takes quite some time i have added an UIActivityIndicatorView to the .xib during the load. However, i would like to use a UIProgressView. When i look at this i do not see any way of using that unless i move the loading code from "loadDBRecords" to the "MainViewController".
My question is: What is the best way of leveraging the UIProgressView with my setup?
You could add a "progressHandler" block to the -loadDBRecords method. Execute the block for every record you load, and pass back a floating-point value between 0.0 and 1.0 indicating the progress thus far. The block can then assign that value to the progress bar, or print it to the console, or whatever you need it to do. (Traditionally, this would be done with a function pointer or a delegate/selector combination, but I've found blocks tend to make your intent clearer—or at least make it easier to show your intent.)
- (void)loadDBRecords:(void (^)(CGFloat progress))progressHandler {
NSUInteger count = /* number of records*/;
for (NSUInteger i = 0; i < count; i++) {
/* load the record */
progressHandler((CGFloat)n / (CGFloat)count);
}
}
I'm creating a simple app which has a list of characters and a list of (4) players, the players is simply a reference to a playable character.
I'm stuck on how to do the following:
Make a reference to the current player on turn
Find out who the next player on turn is
Handling the last player so that it will return to the first player on turn.
Ideally, I would like to be able to do AFTER, FIRST, LAST BEFORE commands on a NSMutableArray, of these I'm able to do lastObject, but there is no firstObject, afterObject, etc.
I believe you can fake BEFORE,AFTER,FIRST commands with objectAtIndex; but ideally I do not want to rely on numeric references because it could be incorrect -- also if its mutable, the size will always change.
Typically, I would be able to do the following in Pseudocode.
Global player_on_turn.player = Null //player_on_turn is a pointer to the player object
; Handle next player on turn
If (player_on_turn.player = Null) Then Error("No player on turn assigned")
If (sizeOf[playerList]==0) Then Error("There are no players in the game")
If After player_on_turn = null Then
; We reset it
player_on_turn.player = First player
Else
; Move to the next player on turn
player_on_turn.player = After player_on_turn.player
End If
With this in mind, what is the best strategy to help handle a player on turn concept as described in the 1-2-3 example above.
Thanks
It probably doesn’t matter what data structure you’re using - at some level you will have to rely on a numerical index (except if you are using linked lists). And this is alright. If you don’t want to use it in your main game implementation that is alright, too. Just create a class that encapsulates those things. First think of the operations you need it to support. My guess here would be those:
- (PlayerObject *) currentPlayer;
- (void) startNextTurn;
If you have this you can write your game using those primitives and worry about how to best implement that later. You can change those at any time without breaking your actual game.
My recommendation would be something like this:
- (PlayerObject *) currentPlayer; {
return [players objectAtIndex: currentPlayerIndex];
}
- (void) startNextTurn; {
++currentPlayerIndex;
if (currentPlayerIndex >= [players count]) {
currentPlayerIndex = 0;
}
}
Using the index there is OK, even if the array is mutable. If you have methods that change the player array they also can take care of the necessary changes to the currentPlayerIndex.
Having this object makes it easy to write unit tests. The global variable you suggest in your pseudo-code makes it impossible to write meaningful unit tests.
Use a State Pattern for the main runloop of the software. Draw it out as a diagram and create variables to control which state the system is in.
You should use a circular list of the players to return current, next, and previous players.
This is also a great question for GameDev on the Stack Exchange.
PS
CocoaHeads puts out a relatively nice set of data objects, including a circular buffer.
I have a machine which uses an NTP client to sync up to internet time so it's system clock should be fairly accurate.
I've got an application which I'm developing which logs data in real time, processes it and then passes it on. What I'd like to do now is output that data every N milliseconds aligned with the system clock. So for example if I wanted to do 20ms intervals, my oututs ought to be something like this:
13:15:05:000
13:15:05:020
13:15:05:040
13:15:05:060
I've seen suggestions for using the stopwatch class, but that only measures time spans as opposed to looking for specific time stamps. The code to do this is running in it's own thread, so should be a problem if I need to do some relatively blocking calls.
Any suggestions on how to achieve this to a reasonable (close to or better than 1ms precision would be nice) would be very gratefully received.
Don't know how well it plays with C++/CLR but you probably want to look at multimedia timers,
Windows isn't really real-time but this is as close as it gets
You can get a pretty accurate time stamp out of timeGetTime() when you reduce the time period. You'll just need some work to get its return value converted to a clock time. This sample C# code shows the approach:
using System;
using System.Runtime.InteropServices;
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
timeBeginPeriod(1);
uint tick0 = timeGetTime();
var startDate = DateTime.Now;
uint tick1 = tick0;
for (int ix = 0; ix < 20; ++ix) {
uint tick2 = 0;
do { // Burn 20 msec
tick2 = timeGetTime();
} while (tick2 - tick1 < 20);
var currDate = startDate.Add(new TimeSpan((tick2 - tick0) * 10000));
Console.WriteLine(currDate.ToString("HH:mm:ss:ffff"));
tick1 = tick2;
}
timeEndPeriod(1);
Console.ReadLine();
}
[DllImport("winmm.dll")]
private static extern int timeBeginPeriod(int period);
[DllImport("winmm.dll")]
private static extern int timeEndPeriod(int period);
[DllImport("winmm.dll")]
private static extern uint timeGetTime();
}
On second thought, this is just measurement. To get an action performed periodically, you'll have to use timeSetEvent(). As long as you use timeBeginPeriod(), you can get the callback period pretty close to 1 msec. One nicety is that it will automatically compensate when the previous callback was late for any reason.
Your best bet is using inline assembly and writing this chunk of code as a device driver.
That way:
You have control over instruction count
Your application will have execution priority
Ultimately you can't guarantee what you want because the operating system has to honour requests from other processes to run, meaning that something else can always be busy at exactly the moment that you want your process to be running. But you can improve matters using timeBeginPeriod to make it more likely that your process can be switched to in a timely manner, and perhaps being cunning with how you wait between iterations - eg. sleeping for most but not all of the time and then using a busy-loop for the remainder.
Try doing this in two threads. In one thread, use something like this to query a high-precision timer in a loop. When you detect a timestamp that aligns to (or is reasonably close to) a 20ms boundary, send a signal to your log output thread along with the timestamp to use. Your log output thread would simply wait for a signal, then grab the passed-in timestamp and output whatever is needed. Keeping the two in separate threads will make sure that your log output thread doesn't interfere with the timer (this is essentially emulating a hardware timer interrupt, which would be the way I would do it on an embedded platform).
CreateWaitableTimer/SetWaitableTimer and a high-priority thread should be accurate to about 1ms. I don't know why the millisecond field in your example output has four digits, the max value is 999 (since 1000 ms = 1 second).
Since as you said, this doesn't have to be perfect, there are some thing that can be done.
As far as I know, there doesn't exist a timer that syncs with a specific time. So you will have to compute your next time and schedule the timer for that specific time. If your timer only has delta support, then that is easily computed but adds more error since the you could easily be kicked off the CPU between the time you compute your delta and the time the timer is entered into the kernel.
As already pointed out, Windows is not a real time OS. So you must assume that even if you schedule a timer to got off at ":0010", your code might not even execute until well after that time (for example, ":0540"). As long as you properly handle those issues, things will be "ok".
20ms is approximately the length of a time slice on Windows. There is no way to hit 1ms kind of timings in windows reliably without some sort of RT add on like Intime. In windows proper I think your options are WaitForSingleObject, SleepEx, and a busy loop.