Welcome to the Cave of Dragonflies guestbook.
Off-topic discussion is allowed, but spam is not; please make sure all your messages are of substantial meaning that at least somebody would be interested in reading and responding to. That being said, obviously I appreciate comments relating to The Cave of Dragonflies, whether they are error reports, questions, suggestions or whatever else you might want to get across.
Rude, offensive or otherwise inappropriate messages will be deleted on sight. Repeat troublemakers will be banned altogether. Please keep any websites entered into the website field reasonably family-friendly.
Users can use BBCode (forum code) to format their messages:
A fun little treat: the spam verification Pokémon at the bottom of the form has a 1/8192 chance of being shiny, the same as in the games prior to the sixth generation. If you get a shiny, congratulations! Feel free to brag in your post (but try to keep the rest of the post meaningful).
Anybody with Admin below their name is definitely me or a trusted person. I myself will always sign as Butterfree. If somebody signs under that name but does not have the Admin label, it is most likely an impostor.
Bulbasaur: I assume you mean a partial quicksort where the higher list is always recursively sorted first? I mean, I don't expect anybody to want to use the favorite Pokémon picker to actually completely sort the entire list of Pokémon.
Mostly I think that would make the favorite Pokémon picker a lot more boring - instead of being given a fresh batch of Pokémon to compare against each other, you have to compare every single Pokémon against some random one you probably don't particularly care about. But I also suspect it's not that efficient because you have to repeatedly choose a bunch of Pokémon that you know aren't close to being your favorites, just because you still like them better than the pivot. Remember, comparison sorts like quicksort are designed around the assumption that the only way to decide the order of elements is to compare two of them at a time. Here the comparison function is a human being, who is privy to considerably more information than just which of some given two elements is smaller, but quicksort has no way of taking advantage of this: it's optimized around doing a minimal number of binary comparisons, which is not at all the best way for humans to do sorting, especially on a list of items they're already familiar with and have some prior idea of the ordering of.
The favorite Pokémon picker uses a tournament-style algorithm with free multiple selection, which I believe makes better use of the human being in addition to being hopefully more interesting for the user. Already in the first round you can definitely eliminate way more than half of the Pokémon, while something Quicksort-like would be stuck with half on average each round.
Do you think that a quicksort would work better for the Pokemon Picker?
This is a really cool game!! I've been trying to find out what my favorite pokes are for the longest and this game(although arduous) help me narrow them down. :)
Commenting on: 08-16-14
Is it possible to make a back/undo button for the favorites test? I've had to reset several times because of accidental double-clicking.
(Alternatively, just blocking the double-click thing if multiple Pokemon are selected could work)