Anonymous user
Talk:Mind boggling card trick: Difference between revisions
m
→thoroughness of shuffling the deck: added a phrase.
m (→thoroughness of shuffling the deck: added a note about correcting the error in the (random) shuffling for the REXX program (for not shuffling the same random card)..) |
m (→thoroughness of shuffling the deck: added a phrase.) |
||
Line 37:
A single shuffle (as used in the REXX program) exchanged two random cards, two shuffles exchanged four random cards, the shuffle was performed two cards at a time, so it is possible to shuffle a card that was previously shuffled, and in somewhat rare occasion, exchange the same card (that is, no effective shuffle). So, for a very few shuffles, instead of 26 shuffles, maybe 25 were effectively performed. Meh. It wasn't worth the (CPU) time to check for that special case, as the REXX program was performing a hundred thousand simulations at a time, and ''each'' simulation performed (at that time) 26 shuffles. (for the initial program test). I wonder how many electrons I killed for this Rosetta Code task. But no trees were felled, by gum! An atom walked up to another atom and said, "Did you know scientists found out that electrons have mass? "No", said the other, I didn't know they were Catholic!" -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:07, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
: (posting to myself): I fixed the REXX code to not do a (random) shuffle on the same card. "Anything worth doing is worth doing right". (Hunter S Thompson). "Anything worth doing is worth overdoing". (Mike Jagger). I end up overdoing it for some (well, maybe more then some) of my REXX programs (witness the boilerplate code for the REXX entry for this Rosetta Code task), but what the hey!!! I should stop talking to myself. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:43, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
| |||