Hi Doriano, > I agree to everything you wrote.
I thought the same about what you wrote! :) >... Then, recalling to my mind >the way a person shuffles cards by hand, I tried to express another >algorithm, which in a certain way lets you to adjust the randomness: a >person can shuffle very well, or not. But, thinking over, my algorithm >does not fully respect this situation, because a true player shuffles >cards in chunks, by taking the last part of a deck and scattering it in >the middle of the remaining part... If someone wants to write a >realistic card games, perhaps could consider this. It could be interesting to define a sort of "randomness evaluation", so we could compare several methods or evaluate the efficient limit to use. For exemple, you take 1000 in your method but may be 500 will be enough? I will take a 10 cards' deck as illustration I could think about 2 criters: 1) absolute difference between the initial and the final positions 2) absolute difference between 2 adjacent items The first criter is not fair because all the places are not equivalent! the 5th position could not exceed a 5 difference but the 0th position could be 9! So we have to consider the serie 0-9 as a ring were 0 is next to 9, so the maximum difference is 5. The same could be said about the second criter! Now, I will stop to talk about that because it's no more Gambas related :( cheers Dominique Simonart ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ Gambas-user mailing list Gambas-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gambas-user