Improving Tracer(s) API about algorithm-visualizer HOT 6 CLOSED

I'd vote for 1. If we provide the users with the option to pass an options object or still use arguments, it might confuse them further. The user will still have all the same questions when they see a bunch of arguments passed into a function plus now they'll also encounter some code that passes an object instead. The only thing option 2 really does is reduces the amount of code we have to change :).

If we go for option 2, we would have an argument (presumably first one) to a function that can possibly represent all remaining arguments, but doesn't have to:

function (optionsOrArg1, arg2, arg3, arg4) {
   if optionsOrArg1 is an object 
     take the values from it
  else
    use all the arguments

  // But what if arg1 being an object is a valid value?
 // Then how to even determine if user passed the options obj? 
}

IMHO, this solution won't make it easier on the users to use Tracers more than option 1. Also the complexity of coding it and handling all of its cases, plus the possible future complications it can cause, don't make it worth it.

Now I understand option 1 is to update every algorithm we have, but the updates are small, and with the nice text editors we all have today, finding and replacing is pretty easy :)

I think making a full switch to an options object is the way to go and here's a nice SO answer to back me up :)

from algorithm-visualizer.

hmm, my primary assumption was that we would never encounter a scenario where the first of the 4 arguments could be valid if it were an object. So the first arg would either be an object (which means ignore any other args) or it would be a Number (then don't ignore the other 3). In that case, something like this would've sufficed:

function f () {
  if (typeof arguments [0] === 'object')
    var {N, ratio, max, min} = arguments [0];

  //proceed to use N min max ratio as normal..
 //like you mentioned above
}

plus we could specify usage in wiki. but then again, it might be a possibility in future
But I think your argument is convincing enough, so yah 1's good!

from algorithm-visualizer.

Love this idea!

from algorithm-visualizer.

So are we going to:

1. Change the API to only support object passing and make appropriate changes in all the visualizations written till now or,
2. Update the API to support both passing of object & individual parameters so the previous code can continue to exist as-it-is and new code can exploit this functionality
   ?
   (I'm in favor of the second one)

from algorithm-visualizer.

Yeah, that all makes sense, but I think our final goal should be to eliminate arguments completely and make a full switch to using an options object. Option 2 can be a temporary solution thought. We can add that so the app still works while we update all the algorithms overtime.

from algorithm-visualizer.

I recently revised the randomizers as @nem035 suggested (3 years and a day ago already!), and now they look like this:

const array2d = Randomize.Array2D({
  N: 5,
  M: 4,
  sorted: false,
  value: () => Randomize.String({ length: 4 })
});

Here is the new documentation about it.

from algorithm-visualizer.