On May 3, 10:16 pm, John Yeung <gallium.arsen...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 3, 11:29 pm, Chris Rebert <c...@rebertia.com> wrote: > > > Probably not the cause of the problem, but where > > did the magic numbers 1.072 and 1.08 come from? > > It is perhaps not the most direct cause of the problem, in the sense > that the magic numbers could take various values and the problem would > still be there. But the magic numbers appear to be used for > "spreading out" bye selection, and that's broken. > > The extended slice as written will always pick the first element, > since the step is guaranteed to be positive. Since the first player > (or None, when there are an odd number of players) stays put in the > first position during the round_robin shuffle, that player will always > be selected for a bye. > > Further, as written, the calculated number of byes has no bearing on > the actual number of byes selected. > > I think what I would do is adjust the shuffling algorithm in such a > way that everyone moves through the various positions in the list > (would it be as simple as adding a shift at the end of > round_robin???). Then I could simply select the byes from one end of > the list (with a regular slice instead of an extended slice). > > John
The "magic numbers" that everyone is wondering about are indeed used for spreading out the bye selection and I got them by simply calculating a line of best fit when plotting several courts: byes ratios. The "byes = #whatever" in my code calculate the number of tuples that need to be placed in the bye_list. At first glance, the suggestion of adding a simple shift at the end of round_robin doesn't seem to work since round_robin already shifts everything except for the first position already. Please correct me if I'm wrong because you might have been suggesting something different. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
