This is my code:

The problem is that when I write "printf("%d", p)" outside the if function, it gives me a completely different result, but if I write the same thing inside the if function, then everything is correct

#include<stdio.h> #include<time.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <math.h> int main () { int cont, s, p, med_geo; int i, r, t, k, h, z, x; int Tablou[6][9]; srand(time(NULL)); for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) { for (x = 0; x < 9; x++) { Tablou[i][x] = rand() % 100 - 50; } } printf("\n"); printf("\nTabloul initial: \n"); for (int q = 0; q < 6; q++) { for (int w = 0; w < 9; w++) { printf("%d\t", Tablou[q][w]); } printf("\n"); } for (r=0;r<6;r++){ s = 0; p = 1; cont = 0; for(t=0;t<9; t++){ if (Tablou[r][t] <0 ){ s = s + Tablou[r][t]; } else{ p = p * Tablou[r][t]; cont++; } printf("%d\n", p); } } }

Can someone help me ?

format your code

format your code

What do yo mean by that ?

What do yo mean by that ?

code in a structured way so it can be read even by a blind person.

code in a structured way so it can be read even by a blind person.

I am new in programming, could you please explain what do you mean by this ? What is wrong with my code ?

prob just the spacing. Also, try to select your code after pastaing in telegram and select to make it monospace for readability sake

like this

int main (){ int fresh, outta, oven; for (expr; expr; expr) { do { // Stuff } while (expr); } return 0; }

and dont forget the return 0; if you are using a descent compiler

now that i took a closer look, if you indent it better, you'd prob find out why your print is in the wrong place

also %d is not good since your geometric mean might be float (real)

plus by definition (context) you need to do square number of elements to get the actual mean

so take a look again and good studies

and dont forget the return 0; if you are using a descent compiler

this is unnecessary. reaching the } that terminates the main function returns a value of 0.

this is unnecessary. reaching the } that terminates the main function returns a value of 0.

such a shame tbh. Wish it was enforced to always return

🤷

🤷‍♂️

how to raise a number to a real power in C?

std::pow?

oh wait

but in C?

for example: pow(2, 1/cont) where cont is a random float number between 1 and 6

That doesn't work

I get error

undefined reference to `pow' collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make[3]: *** [CMakeFiles/untitled8.dir/build.make:104: untitled8] Error 1 make[2]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:96: CMakeFiles/untitled8.dir/all] Error 2 make[1]: *** [CMakeFiles/Makefile2:103: CMakeFiles/untitled8.dir/rule] Error 2 make: *** [Makefile:138: untitled8] Error 2

Yes, unless you are following C89 standard or previous ones

I am making a crawler using a rss and other stuff, but some urls / parsers bandwith is slow e.g china or russia from US servers what is the average time before timeout? 60 or 90?

but in C?

sadly, people think it's a great idea to standardize return omission. So go ahead and have fun not typing 9 extra characters in your code. Did you manage to use exponential function in C?

I am making a crawler using a rss and other stuff, but some urls / parsers bandwith is slow e.g china or russia from US servers what is the average time before timeout? 60 or 90?

i think you'd have better odds getting an answer in the off-topic chat (if you haven't already)

#ot

can someone explain me why in visual studio I must define Size of array and can't do the size in the main function? e.g: #define _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #define SIZE 5 int main() { int myGrades[SIZE]; myGrades[0] = 10; myGrades[1] = 15; myGrades[2] = 20; myGrades[3] = 25; myGrades[4] = 30; for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++) printf("%d ", myGrades[i]); return 0; }

and in other compiler I can do this: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> int main() { int size = 5; int myGrades[size]; myGrades[0] = 10; myGrades[1] = 15; myGrades[2] = 20; myGrades[3] = 25; myGrades[4] = 30; for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) printf("\n%d", myGrades[i]); return 0; }

because VLAs are an optional feature and are not required. According to ISO C the size of the array shall be a compile time constant

/report

/ban

can someone explain me why in visual studio I must define Size of array and can't do the size in the main function? e.g: #define _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #define SIZE 5 int main() { int myGrades[SIZE]; myGrades[0] = 10; myGrades[1] = 15; myGrades[2] = 20; myGrades[3] = 25; myGrades[4] = 30; for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++) printf("%d ", myGrades[i]); return 0; }

Don't get your question. Can you elaborate more

can someone explain me why in visual studio I must define Size of array and can't do the size in the main function? e.g: #define _CRT_SECURE_NO_WARNINGS #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #define SIZE 5 int main() { int myGrades[SIZE]; myGrades[0] = 10; myGrades[1] = 15; myGrades[2] = 20; myGrades[3] = 25; myGrades[4] = 30; for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++) printf("%d ", myGrades[i]); return 0; }

Try changing the name from SIZE to something else.

Like SizeX or something.

sadly, people think it's a great idea to standardize return omission. So go ahead and have fun not typing 9 extra characters in your code. Did you manage to use exponential function in C?

I don't see how making it mandatory that you have to type return 0; at the end of main will be of any help

because VLAs are an optional feature and are not required. According to ISO C the size of the array shall be a compile time constant

i think this is answer suffices

I don't see how making it mandatory that you have to type return 0; at the end of main will be of any help

ofc

ofc

Then why do you say its unfortunate to standardize return omission?

It's important to emphasize the procedural paradigm before anything, so we people understand computability in a fundamental level

not from the get go, but getting the importance of process communication through these details

abstraction is good. OO is neat but let the novices that need to see C in the start get the low level feeling of things. Hiding too much is pythonish

abstraction is good. OO is neat but let the novices that need to see C in the start get the low level feeling of things. Hiding too much is pythonish

I don't follow your arguement, you want to keep everything unnecessarily verbose? This could be used to bring back fun(void) for a function which doesn't take any argument or removing default from switch statement.

9 "extra" key strokes are verbose?

9 "extra" key strokes are verbose?

Yes.

you could just argue that every other feature and aspect in C already is enough for the procedural learning. I'll just assume it's a small pedagogic divergence :)

saying that's verbose is trying hardish

saying that's verbose is trying hardish

Nah, it's you making a big deal out of an understood default behavior, which was omitted out for good

You can just tell someone, if they ask, why doesn't main return anything when I see an int in its definition, That it returns 0 by default and we don't write it because it's a default behavior

why would a youngster just started ask directly such question is beyond me

but suit yourself, i think that works in your education centre

why would a youngster just started ask directly such question is beyond me

Why would you not tell something this basic to a youngster is beyond me

probably different cultures. It's safe to assume here, that even if we tell procedures will inevitably have return values, they won't pose such question even when perceiving main as such.

since it's that obvious for your pupils, i see absolutely no problem in your statement

probably different cultures. It's safe to assume here, that even if we tell procedures will inevitably have return values, they won't pose such question even when perceiving main as such.

I guess so.

since it's that obvious for your pupils, i see absolutely no problem in your statement

I am not a teacher btw. Now that I think about it, yeah, it could cause some confusion amongst absolute beginners.

it's understandable that our experienced coders here would find the need to type return outrageous. There's definitely more important things to do in that stage of career.

it's understandable that our experienced coders here would find the need to type return outrageous. There's definitely more important things to do in that stage of career.

Yep

it's understandable that our experienced coders here would find the need to type return outrageous. There's definitely more important things to do in that stage of career.

I hold kinda similar take. For starters, there should be exposure to data types, function returns. That helps in long run, making our brain a debugger. Being intuitive about coding.

Anyone help me with this

I calculated the sum in book

But the value of compound interest annually was coming wrong in program

It should be 205299.38

/ ban turbo C in 2020 is illegal

/ ban turbo C in 2020 is illegal

Ok bro I'll do in codeblocks

/report screen photo + outdated compiler

But 1st tell me solution

But 1st tell me solution

use double, float is not accurate enough

But 1st tell me solution

I'm pretty sure you got formulae wrong

use double, float is not accurate enough

I don't think that float is an issue in this case