You could do this in one line…

By removing all the linebreaks.

Of course there’s an easier way. Just integrate the state of the art API dedicated for this exact problem. https://isevenapi.xyz/

I know how to fix this!

bool IsEven(int number) {
    bool even = true;
    for (int i = 0; i < number; ++i) {
        if (even == true) {
            even = false;
        }
        else if (even == false) {
            even = true;
        }
        else {
            throw RuntimeException("Could not determine whether even is true or false.");
        }
    }

    if (even == true) {
        return even ? true : false;
    }
    else if (even == false) {
        return (!even) ? false : true;
    }
    else {
        throw RuntimeException("Could not determine whether even is true or false.");
    }
}

Back when I was learning programming a lot of lessons would make you do something like this, and then show you the real way to do it in the next lesson. My reaction was always “why didn’t you lead with this?”.

My solution in perl back in the day when I was a teenage hobbyist who didn’t know about the modulus operator: Divide by 2 and use regex to check for a decimal point.

if ($num / 2 =~ /\./) { return “odd” }
else { return “even” }

def is_even(n):
    match n:
        case 1:
            return False
        case 0:
            return True
        # fix No1
        case n < 0:
            return is_even(-1*n)
        case _:
            return is_even(n-2)

modulo

pseudocode:

if number % 2 == 0
  return "number is even" (is_num_even = 1 or true)
else
  return "number is odd" (is_num_even = 0 or false)

plus you’d want an input validation beforehand

deleted by creator

I would replace each if/else with a while.

there is!

Source tweet

This could be optimized by using a recursive function.

I would love it if someone edited this example and posted it with two statements near the end that are reversed, implying inconsistent behaviour at random in the list ahead, seemingly making this solution less inefficient.

…btw a switch statement is better in this case(get it?)

Modulo