Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

beta test my math game (Patreon)

Published:
2021-11-05 15:52:39
Edited:
2023-06-30 13:38:32
Imported:
2026-06

Content

i'm working on a video about mental math and i made a silly little website to test myself. give it a try and let me know if it's broken / there are ways to improve it! 

- sabrinaUPDATE:Implemented a few suggestions from y'all:

Added a way to view your results at the end

Added an instruction on how to enter your answer

Got rid of a few false-positives because of how the code verified answers

Hopefully (?) made it so when the quiz starts, you're already in the input box. Honestly idk if I did this one right.

Some other stuff I detailed in my github commits that you can peep here (I know my code is gnarly but I still like her)

I decided not to include any live feedback on if you were right/wrong while the quiz is going - the goal is to stay focused on answering the questions until you hit 20. (I also cut it from 30 questions to 20 because 30 was a bit painful.)

Also feel free to share this privately with your friends. Obviously don't blast it somewhere public because it is a Patreon perk, but I can't stop you if you wanna compete with your group chats :) 

Files

quick maths

Comments

do-it-out-of-spite

Everything worked great but I still suck at math. 00:02:33 as my final time with 4 errors :D

Yoav Zack

Can I send it to some of my friends? We really loke to compete in silliy games like this from time to time :P

tiffani stewart

No issues! I got 00:01:33 with no errors :^) thx engineering degree for the math skillz

William Power

its great! definitely need to work on my 16 and 17 times tables apparently

Adam Mencarini

1) on the very first question I was looking for a button to click for submitting an answer, before I thought to just hit enter. 2) Having questions that the answer is negative is a typing nuisance, maybe? 3) It might be worth giving a right/wrong response on each question. At least once during the test I realized I was thinking about a previous answer after I'd submitted it because I wasn't sure if it was right, and wasn't answering the current question. 4) I'd like to see my results at the end! I only got one wrong, but I'd like to know where my math was bad!

Rachel

1:51 with 2 errors, worked fine but i think there should be more visual feedback when you have one wrong

SpaceJay

Oh my God, the multiplication!!! Took almost 5 minutes and got 17 questions wrong. Most from double digit multiplication which I simply don't know how to do, probably some from negative answers (those below zero, couldn't figure out the negative sign)

UmbreonLibris

30/30 in 3:34… Doing 16×18 in my head is what got me, but at least I got the right answer

Coreen Montagna

I feel like I suck at mental math, but I got only one error in 2:36. Would be cool to have the results display the problems you got wrong.

allison

i like it! the fact that there’s not a whole lot going on during the game helps me get “in the zone” for this. after the game’s done, however, i think i’d like to see the breakdown of what i got right and wrong, but other than that this is really good!

CharcoalStyles

There's some stuff in the code that looks a little _weird_ to me but it works, so does it matter? ¯\(°_o)/¯ The one thing that I would suggest is adding `a.focus();` in your start function. This will put the cursor in the input box; shaving a second or two while someone clicks there.

Eliot Hochberg

Did it three times. First time, I didn't pay attention to some of the operators because I was going fast, second time don't know which one I got wrong, third time 0 errors, just over a minute! I would say my math is faster than I can type it, I had to keep looking down to put in my answer

CharcoalStyles

Also, thanks to the console.log, I got 40 seconds and no errors 🤣

Sabrina Cruz

oooh will do! This is my first time playing with javascript so the guts of this thing is Very Whack.

CharcoalStyles

Yeah, generating the array of numbers from 0 to 20 then using `Math.floor(Math.random() * operators.length)` (which returns a random number from 0 to 20) gave me a bit of a laugh. I vaguely remember doing something similar a few years ago!

BearBombs

damn thats fast. whats the trick to multiplying double digits under 10 seconds in your head??

Lance

2:50 with 0 errors. Figured I would get atleast one wrong answer.

Danort4

Although there are no questions that involve decimal answers, I did notice that if the correct answer was 6 and I typed 6.5 or 6.33333333333, it marked me as correct.

Sabrina Cruz

whoa, good catch. I parsed all inputs as integers - I'll fix that now :)

Corporal Burpfart

I kinda like that it doesn't tell you, no need to have you beat yourself up about whether you got something wrong or not - just put in an answer and move on to the next one.

Corporal Burpfart

1:41 with 3 errors. I like that I didn't know how well I did error-wise until the very end.

Eliot Hochberg

I split it up to things I know Example: 17x15 10x15=150 7x15=(7x10=70)+(7x5=35)=105 total 255

BearBombs

I'm really interested in what this video could be now because it seems obvious smaller operations are easier and larger operations (double digits) are hard. Multiplication/division of 2 numbers took me 10-30 seconds every time. I never learned any tricks or shortcuts in school and I've always just resorted to a calculator for that stuff. I got like around 7:30 and 1 wrong answer my first try. Then I tried to test for errors in the text field for a while. Then I just tried to be fast and got 2:20 and 3 wrong my second actual attempt.

Reilly Mercer

2:03 with 0 errors, which I am genuinely surprised about because I am TERRIBLE at multiplication of anything beyond 12x12. I don't know anything about coding so I can't help you there, but I liked the simplistic design. It was easy to focus on the question in front of me, whereas I remember in school having those sheets of 100 quick math questions all in my face used to get my heart racing.

CharcoalStyles

Tested the focus call, works great! When I get some time later I'll have a look through the repo; fix some stuff with comments for you to ignore because you've got much more interesting and valuable stuff to do 🤣

IceBearSupportsCreators

0:42 seconds with 0 errors. Nice quick and fun. I guess since I got them all right, there was no indications on what was right or wrong. But i like the simplistic view of it. lets me focus on the question easily.

Luis

I'm curious, how did you handle the deployment for this website?

Sabrina Cruz

uploaded the package to github and used netlify.

William Power

its become a typing test now, I am enjoying the alter ego

Michael Orgill

I had a few play-throughs to get a bit better exposure. Nothing much more to add to what others have already said above, except from: I got a few 0+ or 0x questions in a row which are so trivial that, when I got lucky and got six in a row on one attempt, it kind of skewed my time downwards… unless the 0+ and 0x (and 1x) questions are somehow key to the purpose/research of your video, I’d consider omitting them, personally?? Looking forward to the next video in any case - please keep up the great work Sabrina and friends :D PS. Everyone else has shared, so I got 00:57 with 0 errors (not my many-zeros run, that was 00:42, which hopefully gives a sense of the scale of my point above!) :)

Eliot Hochberg

Now that I'm prepped, I'm working for speed, and got 32 sec on the third try with no errors. Not sure what the overall goal is, but if it's to see how fast people can do math in their heads, then it should have a spread of different types For me, easiest is powers of 2, 5, and 10. So 10x15 is super easy, but 17x19 is way harder, and can skew the results. Also, plus, minus, multiply and divide by zero are special, and I think it should have one addition/subtraction and one multiply/divide with zero. Negative numbers are also a little tricky, so should have the same amount of those in each test, maybe 2-4? That way, you get a better sense of the average, because if a handful have 16x13, and the rest are all simper ones, definitely will skew the results Oh, and 7x9 is way easier than 17x19

Jeremy Krall

I was surprised I had no wrong answers either, especially with all the negatives. Then when I saw 1:21 time I was really shocked!

Jeremy Krall

I don't remember having any division questions. And all my double digit multiplications had 20 as one of the numbers. Almost seems "too" random for that to have happened.

quentin

On the programming side - on my second attempt I got 21 questions instead of 20.

bonjoery

I just got 22, whooops

CharcoalStyles

It's a test to see how long it takes to get to 20 correct answers. I'd assume that both of you had incorrect answers.

Rose Lidiak

I'd like to know just how much better than other people I am

Candice

0:53, no errors...and I thought I was being slow? (not a brag, just feedback on my first impressions) I don't type numbers regularly, so I felt like it was slowing me down. I don't know if other folks had that perception, but it stood out the whole time. I think I also paused at the first negative number, 'cause I wasn't expecting them and didn't know if I was meant to use the numpad - for that (turns out yes, or at least it was considered correct). I think it's good there's no feedback as you go, it would just be distracting. If you end up with enough data points to get a curve, it might be interesting to see what that looks like...but I don't know how hard that'd be to code (vs. graph and show later).

BeanMcKnee

Love the game! However, I played it on Firefox on my Android phone. I get a numpad for the answers but can't type the negative sign. That would nice if it could be fixed :)

Cartaxo

i had the same problem! i was playing it on my phone and i cannot type negative so i made a few mistakes