We Keep Coding

How to check if a traversion has reached a certain Index in a 2D-Array in Java?

Let's say we have a 2D-boolean Array as a presentation of a maze, the size of the Array is not fixed and random. The walls are depicted as true:
boolean[][] mazeArray = new boolean[width][height];
The exit of the maze is at a fixed Index. How can I check wether the traversion has reached this certain index or not?
My idea was to create an int[ ] to keep track of the position, it gets updated and overwritten with every step:
int[] location = {1,0};
... But I don't understand why my check in the while-loop doesn't work:
while( location[0] != (maze[0].length-1) && location[1] != (maze[1].length-2) ) {
// traversion with pledge algorithm
}

You're making everything so much harder for yourself. Go easier ways.
Use simpler locations handling
Instead of a location[], simlpy use int destinyX and int destinyY. And as your current position, you should use int positionX and int positionY.
If you'd like the OO-stlye more, or maybe wanna keep the gates open for a solution in 3D or n-D, you could introduce a Location class that has X and Y, and all movement and checks could be handled by that class. Then you'd have Location targetLocation = new Location(x,y); and your current position as Location currentPosition = new Location(x,y);. You then could check with if (currentPosition.equals(targetLocation))...; or in your case while(!currentPosition.equals(targetLocation)) {...}
It seems you have misunderstood the array.length function, or you're using it in an awfully inconvenient way.
At the moment you're blindly shooting at the array lengths of maze[]. This is bad for 2 reasons:
array lengths should not have anything to do with positions inside the array (logical paradox), and
because you could never freely move your destination, it would always stick to the right or bottom outsides of the maze
Use the positioning above, this will clear up that problem.
Suggestion: use a byte[][] or enum[][] for maze
At the moment, you only know if you have a wall at a certain location. If you wanna include other elements, like water, treasure, or the target location, wormholes etc, then you should either:
Use a byte[][] and fill it with values
value 0 could be pathways
value 1 could be walls
value 2 could be the exit
value 3 could be the water etc.
Use constants, like static public final int WATER_CODE = 3;
Or, alternatively, create your own enum:
public enum LocationType {PATH, WALL,EXIT,WATER}
and then have maze be like:
LocationType[][] mazeArray = new LocationType[width][height];
and everything is PATH in the beginning, and you can set up WALLS like this:
mazeArray[x][y] = LocationType.WALL;
or water:
mazeArray[x][y] = LocationType.WATER;
Use class or interface for maze[][]
For the sake of Wormhole or extended functionality, you could also use a class instead of an enum:
abstract class LocationType {}
and then implement certain types, like
class Wall extends LocationType {}
or even
class Wormhole extends LocationType {
public Location leadsTo() { /* */ };
}
and
class Treasure extends LocationType {
public int getAmoundOfGoldCoinsFound() { /* */ };
}
If you implement LocationType as an interface, replace 'extends' by 'implements'

The problem with your code is that you check wrong items in your maze array:
maze[0] is the first "line" of your 2d-array
maze[1] is the second "line" of your 2d-array
Proper way of traversing 2d-array is following (I've replaced your location array with separate x and y variables to better visualize the algorithm).
My algorithm enters the 2d mazeArray line by line and then iterates each line's elements.
public class Maze {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int width = 20;
int height = 20;
boolean[][] mazeArray = new boolean[width][height];
int x = 0;
int y = 0;
while (y < mazeArray.length) {
while (x < mazeArray[y].length) {
System.out.println("Traverse at (" + x + ", " + y + ")");
x += 1;
}
x = 0;
y += 1;
}
}
}

Converting a recursive method into a non-recursive method using loop in java

So I'm currently making a game where the instructions are to move left or right within an array using the integer stored at a marked index (circle in this case) until we can get the circle to the last index of the array. The last integer of the array is always 0.
For example,
[4] 1 2 3 1 0, here we start at the circle 0 (index)
We move 4 to the right, 4 1 2 3 [1] 0
Then 1 time to the right, 4 1 2 3 1 [0]. Here the game stops and we win.
My code is as follows for a recursive method:
public static boolean rightWing (int circle, int[] game, List<Integer> checkerList){
int last = game.length-1;
if (circle == last){ // base case for recursion
return true;
}
if (circle < 0){ // if we go out of bounds on the left
return false;
}
if (circle > last){ // if we go out of bounds on the right
return false;
}
if (checkerList.contains(circle)){ // check for the impossible case
return false;
}
checkerList.add(circle); // adds the circle value for the last check to checkerList so we can check for the impossible case
int moveRight = circle + game[circle]; // these two integers help the game move according to the value of the int at circle
int moveLeft = circle - game[circle];
return rightWing( moveRight, game, checkerList) || rightWing(moveLeft, game,checkerList);
}
This works great, but the only problem is it's recursive and slow. I'm trying to redesign it using loops and stacks/queues to make it more efficient, but I'm stuck after writing this (in pseudo):
Boolean rightWing (int circle, List<int> game, List<int> checkerList)
Int lastPlace = game.size() - 1
For int i <- 0 to game.size() - 1 do
If i equals lastPlace then // returns true when i is at the last position of the game
Return true
Any input on how to go forward would be appreciated!

The most important bit: when debugging app for the slowness, you should collect some performance data first to identify where your app is spending the most of its time. Otherwise fixing performance is inefficient. You can use jvisualvm it's bundled with jdk.
Data structures rule the world of performance
One thing why it can be slow is because of this:
if (checkerList.contains(circle)){ // check for the impossible case
return false;
}
The more items you have in the list, the slower it becomes. List has linear complexity for the contains method. You can make it constant complexity if you'll use HashSet. E.g. if you have list with 100 elements, this part will be around slower 100 times with List than with HashSet.
Another thing which might be taking some time is boxing/unboxing: each time you put element to the list, int is being wrapped into new Integer object - this is called boxing. You might want to use IntSet to avoid boxing/unboxing and save on the GC time.
Converting to the iterative form
I won't expect this to affect your application speed, but just for the sake of completeness of the answer.
Converting recursive app to iterative form is pretty simple: each of the method parameters under the cover is stored on a hidden stack on each call of your (or others function). During conversion you just create your own stack and manage it manually
public static boolean rightWingRecursive(int circle, int[] game) {
Set<Integer> checkerList = new HashSet<Integer>();
Deque<Integer> statesToExplore = new LinkedList<>();
int last = game.length - 1;
statesToExplore.push(circle);
while (!statesToExplore.isEmpty()) {
int circleState = statesToExplore.pop();
if (circleState == last) { // base case for recursion
return true;
}
if (circleState < 0) { // if we go out of bounds on the left
continue;
}
if (circleState > last) { // if we go out of bounds on the right
continue;
}
if (checkerList.contains(circle)) { // check for the impossible case
continue;
}
checkerList.add(circle); // adds the circle value for the last check to
// checkerList so we can check for the
// impossible case
int moveRight = circle + game[circle]; // these two integers help the
// game move according to the
// value of the int at circle
int moveLeft = circle - game[circle];
statesToExplore.push(moveRight);
statesToExplore.push(moveLeft);
}
return false;
}

Adding Polygon points from Line2D values

I have a small block of code that is reading Line2D values from an array called lineList (in a different class) and storing them in the new array called list. from here I have been trying to convert all of the line values into Polygon points (a point for each x, y coordinate of a line end).
so far I have it working but its not working for the very first point of the first line in the array (that's what I suspect it is) that is added and I am having trouble finding a solution to this as I have tried including this in the first if statement.
I will greatly appreciate any help that anyone is able to provide for me on this.
Below is the code I am using for adding the points from the Line2D values:
Polygon p = new Polygon();
ArrayList<Line2D> list = new ArrayList<Line2D>();
Color pixel;
boolean firstTime = true;
list = segmentation.getLineList();
//loop through lineList and add all x and y coordinates to relative x and y arrays
for(int i = 0; i < list.size(); i++) {
if(firstTime == true){
Line2D line = list.get(i);
Point2D startPoint = line.getP1();
Point2D endPoint = line.getP2();
int startX = (int) startPoint.getX();
int startY = (int) startPoint.getY();
int endX = (int) endPoint.getX();
int endY = (int) endPoint.getY();
p.addPoint(p.xpoints[i] = startX, p.ypoints[i] = startY);
p.addPoint(p.xpoints[i] = endX, p.ypoints[i] = endY);
startPoint = null;
endPoint = null;
line = null;
firstTime = false;
}
else {
Line2D line = list.get(i);
Point2D endPoint = line.getP2();
int endX = (int) endPoint.getX();
int endY = (int) endPoint.getY();
p.addPoint(p.xpoints[i] = endX, p.ypoints[i] = endY);
endPoint = null;
line = null;
}
}
Below is an example of the first point (lower most point) not being included in the polygon points.

Seems like a lot of duplicated code to me. Before we try any more debugging, let's refactor the code and make it simpler to understand and debug.
Refactoring
The first bit of code we can pull out is the code to add a point to the Polygon. Here's the new method.
protected void addPoint(Polygon p, Point2D point) {
int x = (int) point.getX();
int y = (int) point.getY();
p.addPoint(x, y);
}
Now, I didn't get to this in one refactoring. I first pulled out the end point code, because it was identical. After reflecting on the code some more, I generalized it so I could use it for the start point code.
When I first saw this line of code
p.addPoint(p.xpoints[i] = startX, p.ypoints[i] = startY);
I thought, WTF? I'd never seen anyone set values in a method call. In a where clause, sure.
After about 5 minutes of thought, I realized that the Polygon class internal values were being set after the execution of the addPoint method. While this might be useful with some other method call, it's not necessary here. The method call can be simplified to
p.addPoint(x, y);
Java developers, if you need yet another reason for making your class variables non-public, this is a real good one. Keeps people from setting your class variables after you've set them in your setter method.
Priming Read
We can get rid of the first time switch, and a lot of code, if we use a little known algorithm called the priming read.
Most for loops have the input statement as the first statement in the loop. The for (String s : stringList) construction of a loop hides the fact that the input statement is the first statement in the loop.
But sometimes, you have a method where you need a priming read. This method is one of those times.
In pseudo code, a priming read works like this.
Read input
for loop
process input
read input
end loop
process last input
By using a priming read, I was able to greatly simplify the createPolygon method.
Any Cobol programmer reading this thought, "Yep, the priming read."
Java programmers, keep this priming read idea in your mind. You won't use it that often, but as you see, it greatly reduces the amount of code you need in certain cases.
Refactored Code
public Polygon createPolygon(Segmentation segmentation) {
Polygon p = new Polygon();
List<Line2D> list = segmentation.getLineList();
if (list.size() < 2) return p;
Line2D line = list.get(0);
addPoint(p, line.getP1());
// loop through lineList and add all x and y coordinates to relative x
// and y arrays
for (int i = 1; i < list.size(); i++) {
addPoint(p, line.getP2());
line = list.get(i);
}
addPoint(p, line.getP2());
return p;
}
protected void addPoint(Polygon p, Point2D point) {
int x = (int) point.getX();
int y = (int) point.getY();
p.addPoint(x, y);
}
I did two additional things to the code.
I added a test for less than 2 lines. Basically, it takes at least 2 lines to create a triangle (polygon). There was no point executing the method for 1 line or zero lines.
I changed the ArrayList reference to List. In Java, it's better to use an interface over a concrete class. Since the only List method we're using in the code is the get method, we can use the interface. The advantage to using the interface is that the createPolygon method doesn't care whether or not the getLineList method returns an ArrayList, a LinkedList, or a custom class that implements List. This makes future modifications easier.

(Java) Collision Detection Walls

I've been trying to use my collision detection to stop objects from going through each other. I can't figure out how to do it though.
When objects collide, I've tried reversing the direction of their velocity vector (so it moves away from where it's colliding) but sometimes the objects get stuck inside each other.
I've tried switching their velocities but this just parents objects to each other.
Is there a simple way to limit objects' movement so that they don't go through other objects? I've been using the rectangle intersects for collisions, and I've also tried circle collision detection (using distance between objects).
Ideas?
package objects;
import java.awt.Rectangle;
import custom.utils.Vector;
import sprites.Picture;
import render.Window;
// Super class (game objects)
public class Entity implements GameObject{
private Picture self;
protected Vector position;
protected Vector velocity = new Vector(0,0);
private GameObject[] obj_list = new GameObject[0];
private boolean init = false;
// Takes in a "sprite"
public Entity(Picture i){
self = i;
position = new Vector(i.getXY()[0],i.getXY()[1]);
ObjectUpdater.addObject(this);
}
public Object getIdentity() {
return this;
}
// position handles
public Vector getPosition(){
return position;
}
public void setPosition(double x,double y){
position.setValues(x,y);
self.setXY(position);
}
public void setPosition(){
position.setValues((int)Window.getWinSize()[0]/2,(int)Window.getWinSize()[1]/2);
}
// velocity handles
public void setVelocity(double x,double y){ // Use if you're too lazy to make a vector
velocity.setValues(x, y);
}
public void setVelocity(Vector xy){ // Use if your already have a vector
velocity.setValues(xy.getValues()[0], xy.getValues()[1]);
}
public Vector getVelocity(){
return velocity;
}
// inferface for all game objects (so they all update at the same time)
public boolean checkInit(){
return init;
}
public Rectangle getBounds() {
double[] corner = position.getValues(); // Get the corner for the bounds
int[] size = self.getImageSize(); // Get the size of the image
return new Rectangle((int)Math.round(corner[0]),(int)Math.round(corner[1]),size[0],size[1]); // Make the bound
}
// I check for collisions where, this grabs all the objects and checks for collisions on each.
private void checkCollision(){
if (obj_list.length > 0){
for (GameObject i: obj_list){
if (getBounds().intersects(i.getBounds()) && i != this){
// What happens here?
}
}
}
}
public void updateSelf(){
checkCollision();
position = position.add(velocity);
setPosition(position.getValues()[0],position.getValues()[1]);
init = true;
}
public void pollObjects(GameObject[] o){
obj_list = o;
}
}
Hopefully it's not too difficult to read.
Edit:
So I've been using the rectangle intersection method to calculate the position of an object and to modify velocity. It's working pretty well. The only problem is that some objects push others, but that's so big deal. Collision is pretty much an extra thing for the mini game I'm creating. Thanks a lot of the help.
All that being said, I'd still really appreciate elaboration on mentioned ideas since I'm not totally sure how to implement them into my project.

Without seeing your code, I can only guess what's happening. I suspect that your objects are getting stuck because they overshooting the boundaries of other objects, ending up inside. Make sure that each object's step is not just velocity * delta_time, but that the step size is limited by potential collisions. When there is a collision, calculate the time at which it occurred (which is somewhere in the delta_time) and follow the bounce to determine the final object location. Alternatively, just set the objects to be touching and the velocities changed according to the law of conservation of momentum.
EDIT After seeing your code, I can expand my answer. First, let me clarify some of my terminology that you asked about. Since each call to updateSelf simply adds the velocity vector to the current position, what you have in effect is a unit time increment (delta time is always 1). Put another way, your "velocity" is actually the distance (velocity * delta time) traveled since the last call to updateSelf. I would recommend using an explicit (float) time increment as part of your simulation.
Second, the general problem of tracking collisions among multiple moving objects is very difficult. Whatever time increment is used, it is possible for an object to undergo many collisions in that increment. (Imagine an object squeezed between two other objects. In any given time interval, there is no limit to the number of times the object might bounce back and forth between the two surrounding ones.) Also, an object might (within the resolution of the computations) collide with multiple objects at the same time. The problem is even more complicated if the objects actually change size as they move (as your code suggests they may be doing).
Third, you have a significant source of errors because you are rounding all object positions to integer coordinates. I would recommend representing your objects with floating-point objects (Rectangle2D.Float rather than with Rectangle; Point2D.Float rather than Vector). I would also recommend replacing the position field with a rectangular bounds field that captures both the position and size. That way, you don't have to create a new object at each call to getBounds(). If the object sizes are constant, this would also simplify the bounds updating.
Finally, there's a significant problem with having the collision detection logic inside each object: when object A discovers that it would have hit object B, then it is also the case that object B would have hit object A! However, object B does its own calculations independently of object A. If you update A first, then B might miss the collision, and vice versa. It would be better to move the entire collision detection and object movement logic to a global algorithm and keep each game object relatively simple.
One approach (which I recommend) is to write an "updateGame" method that advances the game state by a given time increment. It would use an auxiliary data structure that records collisions, which might look like this:
public class Collision {
public int objectIndex1; // index of first object involved in collision
public int objectIndex2; // index of second object
public int directionCode; // encoding of the direction of the collision
public float time; // time of collision
}
The overall algorithm advances the game from the current time to a new time defined by a parameter deltaTime. It might be structured something like this:
void updateGame(float deltaTime) {
float step = deltaTime;
do (
Collision hit = findFirstCollision(step);
if (hit != null) {
step = Math.max(hit.time, MIN_STEP);
updateObjects(step);
updateVelocities(hit);
} else {
updateObjects(step);
}
deltaTime -= step;
step = deltaTime;
} while (deltaTime > 0);
}
/**
* Finds the earliest collision that occurs within the given time
* interval. It uses the current position and velocity of the objects
* at the start of the interval. If no collisions occur, returns null.
*/
Collision findFirstCollision(float deltaTime) {
Collision result = null;
for (int i = 0; i < obj_list.length; ++i) {
for (int j = i + 1; j < obj_list.length; ++j) {
Collision hit = findCollision(i, j, deltaTime);
if (hit != null) {
if (result == null || hit.time < result.time) {
result = hit;
}
}
}
}
return result;
}
/**
* Calculate if there is a collision between obj_list[i1] and
* obj_list[i2] within deltaTime, given their current positions
* and velocities. If there is, return a new Collision object
* that records i1, i2, the direction of the hit, and the time
* at which the objects collide. Otherwise, return null.
*/
Collision findCollision(int i1, int i2, float deltaTime) {
// left as an exercise for the reader
}
/**
* Move every object by its velocity * step
*/
void updateObjects(float step) {
for (GameObject obj : obj_list) {
Point2D.Float pos = obj.getPosition();
Point2D.Float velocity = obj.getVelocity();
obj.setPosition(
pos.getX() + step * velocity.getX(),
pos.getY() + step * velocity.getY()
);
}
}
/**
* Update the velocities of the two objects involved in a
* collision. Note that this does not always reverse velocities
* along the direction of collision (one object might be hit
* from behind by a faster object). The algorithm should assume
* that the objects are at the exact position of the collision
* and just update the velocities.
*/
void updateVelocities(Collision collision) {
// TODO - implement some physics simulation
}
The MIN_STEP constant is a minimum time increment to ensure that the game update loop doesn't get stuck updating such small time steps that it doesn't make progress. (With floating point, it's possible that deltaTime -= step; could leave deltaTime unchanged.)
Regarding the physics simulation: the Wikipedia article on Elastic collision provides some nice math for this problem.

Sample code not doing as expected

Here is the algorithm (not working) Please let me know where the error is
Thanks
private void checkSouth(Location point, int player) {
//Loop through everything south
boolean isthereAnOppositePlayer=false;
int oppositePlayer=0;
//Set opposite player
if (player==1) {
oppositePlayer=2;
}else{
oppositePlayer=1;
}
for (int i = point.getVertical(); i < 8; i++) {
//Create a location point with the current location being compared
MyLocation locationBeingChecked= new MyLocation();
locationBeingChecked.setHorizontal(point.getHorizontal());
locationBeingChecked.setVertical(i);
int value = board[locationBeingChecked.getVertical()][locationBeingChecked.getHorizontal()];
//If the first checked is the opposite player
if (value==oppositePlayer) {
//Then potential to evaluate more
isthereAnOppositePlayer=true;
}
//If it isn't an opposite player, then break
if(!isthereAnOppositePlayer && value!=0){
break;
}
//If another of the player's piece found or 0, then end
if (isthereAnOppositePlayer && value==player || isthereAnOppositePlayer && value==0) {
break;
//end
}
//Add to number of players to flip
if(isthereAnOppositePlayer && value==oppositePlayer && value!=0){
//add to array
addToPiecesToTurn(locationBeingChecked);
}
}
}

It looks like the locations that got rotated back to the other player are the exact same as those rotated during the first move. I would guess that the array being populated by addToPiecesToTurn is perhaps not being cleared out between each move, so all the previous locations are still in there.
If you are storing the pieces to be turned in an ArrayList, you can use the clear() method to erase the contents of the collection between each turn.
Another possible problem is that you are checking for the opposite player, and then instantly beginning to populate addToPiecesToTurn. However, the pieces in that direction are not necessarily valid to be rotated unless they are "sandwiched" in by a second location containing the current player's piece. I don't think your code is properly checking for that case; when that happens, you'll want to somehow skip flipping those pieces to the other player, such as clearing out the array of piecesToTurn.
Edit: Looking at your current solution where you are implementing every direction separately, you are going to have a lot of duplicated code. If you think about what it means to walk along a certain direction, you can think of it as adjusting the x/y value by a "step" amount. The step amount could be -1 for backwards, 0 for no move, or 1 for forwards. Then you could create a single method that handles all directions without duplicating the logic:
private void checkDirection(Location point, int player, int yStep, int xStep) {
int x = point.getHorizontal() + xStep;
int y = point.getVertical() + yStep;
MyLocation locationBeingChecked = new MyLocation();
locationBeingChecked.setHorizontal(x);
locationBeingChecked.setVertical(y);
while (isValid(locationBeingChecked)) {
// do the logic here
x += xStep;
y += yStep;
locationBeingChecked = new MyLocation();
locationBeingChecked.setHorizontal(x);
locationBeingChecked.setVertical(y);
}
}
You would need to implement isValid to check that the location is valid, i.e., in the board. Then you could call this method for each direction:
// north
checkDirection(curPoint, curPlayer, -1, 0);
// north-east
checkDirection(curPoint, curPlayer, -1, 1);
// east
checkDirection(curPoint, curPlayer, 0, 1);
// etc

This is the sort of problem that is ripe for some unit testing. You could very easily set up a board, play a move, and validate the answer, and the test results would give plenty of insight into where your expectations and reality diverge.

why didn't you use a 2d array ?
each cell would contain an enum : EMPTY, PLAYER_1, PLAYER_2 .
then, in order to go over the cells, you simply use loops for each direction.
for example, upon clicking on a cell , checking to the right would be:
for(int x=pressedLocation.x+1;x<cells[pressedLocation.y].length;++x)
{
Cell cell=cells[pressedLocation.y][x];
if(cell==EMPTY||cell==currentPlayerCell)
break;
cells[pressedLocation.y][x]=currentPlayerCell;
}
checking from top to bottom would be:
for(int y=pressedLocation.y+1;y<cells.length;++y)
{
Cell cell=cells[y][pressedLocation.x];
if(cell==EMPTY||cell==currentPlayerCell)
break;
cells[y][pressedLocation.x]=currentPlayerCell;
}