There is an issue with the program when the user correctly guesses the number. The program should end when the break statement executes in the while loop found in main(), but instead it times out.

import random


def main():
    level = get_level()
    number = generate_random_number(level)

    while True:
        guess = get_guess()

        if check_guess(number, guess) == False:
            continue
        else:
            break


def get_level():
    while True:
        level = input("Level: ")

        try:
            int(level)
        except ValueError:
            continue
        if int(level) <= 0:
            continue
        else:
            return int(level)

def generate_random_number(level):
    number = random.randint(1, level)

    return number

def get_guess():
    while True:
        guess = input("Guess: ")

        try:
            int(guess)
        except ValueError:
            continue
        if int(guess) <= 0:
            continue
        else:
            return int(guess)

def check_guess(number, guess):
    if guess > number:
        print("Too large!")

        return False
    if guess < number:
        print("Too small!")

        return False
    if guess == number:
        print("Just right!")

        return True


main()
  • gedhrel@lemmy.world
    7·
    4 days ago

    How is that checker configured?

    It might be doing something like this:

    import student_module
student_module.main()

    and because you’re already invoking main as the module is imported, it’s getting stuck the second time around. Maybe add some indicative print at the entrypoint to your main function.

    Another reply in here has supplied the standard idiom for making a module executable:

    if __name__ == "__main__":
  main()
    • logging_strict
      1·
      2 days ago

      What duh eh does standard idiom mean?

      In computer programming, a programming idiom, code idiom or simply idiom is a code fragment having a semantic role[1] which recurs frequently across software projects. It often expresses a special feature of a recurring construct in one or more programming languages, frameworks or libraries. This definition is rooted in the linguistic definition of “idiom”.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_idiom

      So this term is vague and abstract. Really not a specific term or grouping of related things.

      The actual terminology

      That standard idiom is called, process guard or simply guard. Learn about this term when doing anything involving multiprocessing.

      The if __name__ == “__main__”: guard is important when working with multiprocessing in Python. This prevents the creation of duplicate processes when the module is imported.

      https://labex.io/tutorials/python-how-to-pass-arguments-in-python-multiprocessing-430780

      So it’s totally not for what its being described as. Or that’s an oversimplification with a loss of vital details of it’s actual purpose.

      It could be worse

      When don’t know the name for something, Call it stuff!. Ya know, when really suack at naming things, be unrepentant! Stuff is as bad of a term i could come up with. Means didn’t know how to describe it to accurately relate what it is or does, without being vulgar; out of fear the typos author left an Easter egg which is best left lie.

      Used this term once, for a SQLAlchemy non-request based router implementation, the Session (term already taken) i call SessionStuff. Doesn’t that just scream competence and authoritative implementation?

      What do you do for a job? Urrrh … stuff?

      Regretted immediately and still do. Cuz session seems to have three different contexts / meanings.

      Oh shit! Used the term, stuff. That’s code prefer to not even read. That’s a thing of nightmares that haunts our collective waking moments.

        • logging_strict
          1·
          1 day ago

          That’s what code reviews feel like. Don’t take it personally. Sugar coating advice is a skill when working in groups.

          Evidently i’m not, so got that code review advice the less than tender way.

          Everyone one else was not critical and let these avoidable coding mistakes slide. That doesn’t fill me with confidence. Should strive to spend more time testing code bases to eventually be able to see and avoid these kinda coding mistakes.

          If anyone feels the need to set me on the road to becoming a lovable teddy bear full of positivity and group comradery, jawboning alone is too kind, feel free to put me in the hot chair by reviewing packages have written and published.

          Have ordered the packages according to the value you’d gain by learning them.

          logging-strict

          wreck

          pytest-logging-strict

          sphinx-external-toc-strict

          drain-swamp and drain-swamp-action

    • milon@lemm.eeOP
      1·
      3 days ago

      The idiom allowed it to pass the checker’s tests! Thanks for your help!

      • logging_strict
        1·
        2 days ago

        You picked up an STD from mvirts. That dodgy terminology has been passed on and added to your lexicon.

        South Park suggested the cure for this, eat a banana. Life doesn’t have to make sense, roll with it.

        Quickly taking a shower was oddly never suggested.