pigeon | RPC framework of DIANPING

After a couple of issues on Flutter (1 and 2), where Stuart Morgan (a developer from Google probably working on Dart / Pigeon) gave me some help, I realized that my class should look like:

I played around with the code for a bit and got something that worked. My initial suggestion is going to be that you shouldn't try doing left and right with vanilla javaScript and the up and down with jQuery. I used jQuery to get this to work, but it can certainly be done with vanilla javaScript as well.

The first thing that I did was make a global variable n that keeps track of our position in the grid, so when you press the left or right arrow it either adds 1 or subtracts 1 from n, and up and down arrows either adds or subtracts 25.

For each of our little if statements I've made them a bit more generic. First it selects the current div that the player is in, and using the .html() function in jQuery grabs the HTML (as a string) which we can then use. I noticed that in your initial code when you were trying to add the player variable with .append() you got an error about string literals. Since the selection of player was a jQuery object it wasn't able to append that since .append() takes in a string (aka "Hello, World!"). Secondly, when we get the response from .html() (which is a string), we are then able to append it to a new position in the grid. Doing this means we're moving positions so n needs to be changed as I stated above. Note that I also used .empty() to clear the player from the previous block. Finally, we can append player which would look something like

In HTML file add this div with class as parent element of tables

You can compare valeus for not equal to 0 and create joined values by separator added to columns names, last ncessary split for lists:

If two words are anagrams, they have the same numbers of same letters:

I made a for-loop that went through a folder and populated a list with the image names. Then just called the list in place of

No, encoding/json.Unmarshal will not return an error if the target struct has fields for which the source json does not contain any matching object keys.

Here is one way to do it which leverages the built-in next function and its default argument:

Bottom line of those SOLID principles, is to make the code more understandable, easy to maintain, and easy to scale.

Each solution would work, but think, does it make sense for your code to split those behaviors into two different interfaces?

Or maybe it would be better to create these interfaces: