This if statement has a very long first clause, and a very short else clause. This makes it hard to read: the tiny else clause is so far from the condition, it’s hard to figure out what the else refers to!
if (cedAfo() > jeue || !cism || amvu <= 4) {
...
...
// Pretend there is lots of code here
...
...
} else {
dedi();
}
Improve readability by refactoring this conditional so that its two clauses are swapped: what is now the second clause (the else clause) comes first, and the first clause comes second.
if (amvu >= 4 && cism && cedAfo() < jeue) {
dedi();
} else {
...
...
// Pretend there is lots of code here
...
...
}
Things to double-check in your solution:
!(...) Instead, make sure you negate the condition by changing each part of it.Pretend there is lots of code here when you write out your solution! Just draw three dots; that’s enough.Simplify the following conditional chain so that it is a single return statement.
if (vont && wudong()) {
if (wudong()) {
return true;
}
if (blen) {
return true;
}
}
if (celSeour() == 2) {
return true;
}
return false;
return celSeour() == 2 && (blen || vont) && wudong();
Bonus challenge: rewrite the if/else chain above so that instead of consisting of many return true; statements with one return false; at the end, it has many return false; statements with one return true; at the end.
if (!vont && !blen || celSeour() != 2) {
if (!wudong()) {
return false;
}
}
return true;
Simplify the following messy chain of conditionals:
if (pso >= 9) {
rolasm();
}
if (pe == false && pso <= 9) {
glusm();
}
if (pso <= 9 && pe != false) {
priDaum();
}
{
if (pso >= 9) {
rolasm();
}
if (!pe) {
glusm();
}
priDaum();
}
Things to double-check in your solution:
== true and == false checks?else, no final if.Related puzzles: