Closed maciej-pomykala closed 4 years ago
I will not be reporting the dropped out players' hands (empty arrays) in the hands
object.
Let me know if you disagree
Ok, just a sanity check. What is the API, without our a priori interpretation, actually telling us if we do this? It says, there are (e.g.) 5 players, 2 of whom are dealt cards this round - (e.g.) 4 and 6, while 3 of them got dealt nothing this round. Does that unequivocally communicate that they are out of the game? I think it does. Agree?
When we want to know something fundamental about players, we look into players
.
The content of hands
depends on what we are authorised to see, so we are not really expecting the API to tell us meaningful things using hands
When I'm thinking about whether the API unequivocally communicates that these players are out of the game, I think it does, but under the condition that we are not expecting it to be hiding things away from us because of privacy issues.
Yeah, I think what's in hands
is fine either way. The players
object's telling us clearly that those players have 0 cards. Not "hidden"
, not null
, not -1
but 0
. This seems fine.
Currently, the get state endpoint of the API does not mention players who were playing in the game but have lost. It would be nicer if it did.
The players will be listed with
n_cards = 0
As discussed on our call.