[chrisseaton]

> I'm at a massive disadvantage if I get something I cannot eat at all

Yes.... like a game of roulette where you sometimes lose it all and get nothing out of it at all.

[Fnoord]

Your definition of success is just an excuse for bad software, with the reasoning being "cause RL roulette works like this as well". Reminds me of car analogies.

What you desire is a very basic, boring version of roulette which you can easily make with a few lines of Python code.

random.randrange(0, 4) # number of toppings random.randrange(1, 100) # this in a loop iterating with result of previous amount, and this from a database where each number representing a topping.

Its much more fun to do some advanced stuff with randomisation such as adding weights, blacklists, whitelists, edible combinations, etc. When you get edible results based on randomisation is when I call it a success.

Second, you're excluding a significant amount of people [1] by not catering to vegetarians. Regardless of your dietary preference this is not done in 2017.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetarianism_by_country

[reaperducer]

> this is not done in 2017

If you can choose not to eat certain things, the rest of the world can choose not to be bound by your artificial social constructs.

/ "Not done in 2017"... SMH.

[Fnoord]

My link proves that vegetarianism is a significant group which you can cater to. The system I proposed does not force you to be bound by my artificial social constructs (with which you assume I am a vegetarian which you are wrong about, btw). The system I proposed takes into account the option of vegetarianism, and allows a vegetarian to also partake in the overall system without damaging your fun in any way except the mention of a diet you apparently do not agree with.

At the very least, a bunch of disclaimers that the outcome might not be according to certain diets (ie. "the random outcome is unlikely to be kosher, halal, vegetarian, etc").