Assignment #2 if statements, some buttons, and a buzzer

My little device plays 4 different notes, (one when each of the buttons is pressed). I initially tried to write a program in which a tone would be played depending on the number of consecutive buttons pressed, but I found that difficult to work with> it also did not have the functionality i wanted. I researched online about how to make each function work, then slowly stitched it together. I programmed the notes, bu looking up how many Hertz each of my desired notes was, and plugging it into the program.

const int buttonPin1 = 2;
const int buttonPin2 = 3;
const int buttonPin3 = 4;
const int buttonPin4 = 5;// the number of the pushbutton pin
int Buzzer1 = 6;
int Buzzer2 = 7;
int Buzzer3 = 8;
int Buzzer4 = 9;
int led1 = 10;
int led2 = 11;
int led3 = 12;
int led4 = 13;
int led4State = LOW;

// variables will change:
int buttonState1 = 0;
int buttonState2 = 0;
int buttonState3 = 0;
int buttonState4 = 0;
// variable for reading the pushbutton status

void setup() {
  // initialize the piezo as output:
  pinMode(Buzzer1, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(Buzzer2, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(Buzzer3, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(Buzzer4, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led1, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led2, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led3, OUTPUT);
  pinMode(led4, OUTPUT);
  // initialize the pushbutton pin as an input:
  pinMode(buttonPin1, INPUT);
  pinMode(buttonPin2, INPUT);
  pinMode(buttonPin3, INPUT);
  pinMode(buttonPin4, INPUT);
}

void loop() {
  // read the state of the pushbutton value:
  int buttonState1 = digitalRead(buttonPin1);
  int buttonState2 = digitalRead(buttonPin2);
  int buttonState3 = digitalRead(buttonPin3);
  int buttonState4 = digitalRead(buttonPin4);


  // check if the pushbutton is pressed.
  // if it is, the buttonState is HIGH:
  if (buttonState4 == LOW)
  {
    noTone(Buzzer1);
    digitalWrite(led4, LOW);
  }
  else if (buttonState4 == HIGH)
  {
    //digitalWrite(led2, LOW);
    digitalWrite(led4, HIGH);
    tone(Buzzer1, 261);
  }

  if (buttonState3 == LOW)
  {
    noTone(Buzzer2);
    digitalWrite(led3, LOW);
  }
  else if (buttonState3 == HIGH)
  {
    //digitalWrite(led2, LOW);
    digitalWrite(led3, HIGH);
    tone(Buzzer2, 349);
  }

  if (buttonState2 == LOW)
  {
    noTone(Buzzer3);
    digitalWrite(led2, LOW);
  }
  else if (buttonState2 == HIGH)
  {
    //digitalWrite(led2, LOW);
    digitalWrite(led2, HIGH);
    tone(Buzzer3, 392);
  }

  if (buttonState1 == LOW)
  {
    noTone(Buzzer4);
    digitalWrite(led1, LOW);
  }
  else if (buttonState1 == HIGH)
  {
    //digitalWrite(led2, LOW);
    digitalWrite(led1, HIGH);
    tone(Buzzer4, 440);
  }

Also, my post about the reading:

Despite initially finding myself strongly disagreeing with the author’s definition of Interactivity, I eventually found myself drawn in by his argument. The author has a very specific definition of interactivity:  a cyclic process in which two actors alternately listen, think, and speak. In other words, in his eyes at least, an interaction is like a conversation. He then proceeds to explain that a person cannot have a conversation with an object that does not speak back in any way, does not think, or cannot listen. (The way he says this is rather cheeky, and his self-importance gets on my nerves, but I’ll let it slide). He discusses variability in the level of interactivity a thing can have. The line that won me over was “How many times has your heart protested as you watched the protagonist in a movie do something disastrous?” I related to my lack of ability to have a conversation with a movie. That being said, I believe the author’s definition, as he defines it, is valid.

Here is a cheeky little picture I found one time that reminded me of the reading 🙂