Human Strategy #732
Human Strategy #732
Conversation
This reverts commit aa8df17.
| class Human(Player): | ||
| """ | ||
| A strategy that prompts for keyboard input rather than deriving its own | ||
| action. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps can we add:
This is to be used interactively and is not expected to be used like the other strategies.
Not sure if that's quite the right wording but I think having something to kind of say: "if you're just poking around and having a look, this strategy is indeed a bit 'weird'"...
| name: string | ||
| The name of the human player | ||
| c_symbol: string | ||
| The symbol to denote cooperation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps:
The symbol to denote cooperation at the interactive prompt
?
| c_symbol: string | ||
| The symbol to denote cooperation | ||
| d_symbol: string | ||
| The symbol to denote defection |
| @@ -72,6 +72,9 @@ Here are the docstrings of all the strategies in the library. | |||
| .. automodule:: axelrod.strategies.handshake | |||
| :members: | |||
| :undoc-members: | |||
| .. automodule:: axelrod.strategies.human | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know the answer to this question but should this be documented/listed in all_strategies? I wonder if it would be best left outside of it as that index gives a nice list of 'research' strategies (the cheaters being an immediate counter example to that point of view). No strong feelings from me just think it's worth thinking about.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll take it out whilst we think further....
| >>> match.play() #doctest: +SKIP | ||
|
|
||
| You will be prompted for the action to play at each turn and will be able to | ||
| access the results of the match as described in :ref:`creating_matches` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth showing some example of the prompt? It needn't be too extensive and it would not include the >>> so it wouldn't be picked up by the doctests. So something like (after what you have already written):
This will then prompt the user for inputs of C or D:
Starting new match
Turn 1 action [C or D] for me: C
Turn 1: me played C, opponent played C
Turn 2 action [C or D] for me: D
Turn 2: me played D, opponent played C
Turn 3 action [C or D] for me: C
[('C', 'C'), ('C', 'D'), ('D', 'C')]
after this the match object can be manipulated as described in http://axelrod.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorials/getting_started/match.html
|
This is 👍 from me, just the one simple question. |
| toolbar = None | ||
| print_statement = '{}Starting new match'.format(linesep) | ||
|
|
||
| return { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason to return a dictionary rather than a tuple? Just curious.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like having the readable keys and I was too lazy to create a NamedTuple!!
A strategy that prompts for keyboard input rather than deriving its own action.
closes #728