|
|
| (37 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | == Week 1 ==
| + | Woo hoo! It begins! |
| | | | |
| − | "Blah blah blah" said [[User:Warwick Irwin]]. Nobody else got to say much. Some wiki pages were mentioned, including:
| + | This is a record of some real and imagined events that occurred during 427 lecture times. |
| − | * [[Start here]]
| + | |
| − | ** [[Wiki users]]
| + | |
| − | *** [[Account setup]]
| + | |
| − | * [[About COSC427]]
| + | |
| − | ** [[Teaching and learning style]]
| + | |
| − | ** [[427 assessment]]
| + | |
| − | * [[OO wisdom]]
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | A big pile of books was waved threateningly at the students.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Everybody was asked to set up an account using their [[Real name]].
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Suddenly, it was Wednesday and everything changed. The [[Video rental system]] design example appeared, and students huddled into groups to scribble unintelligible marks on scraps of paper. Some of these scribbles were copied to the whiteboard, where they remained unintelligible. Several incantations were uttered:
| + | |
| − | * [[Separation of concerns]]
| + | |
| − | * [[Many to many association idiom]]
| + | |
| − | * [[Type and instance idiom]] (Couldn't think of a better name.)
| + | |
| − | * [[Beware type switches]]
| + | |
| − | * [[Switch statements smell]]
| + | |
| − | * [[Avoid redundant data]]
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Learning happened, it seems.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | A brave student (or students) should now update the [[Video rental system]] page with a record of the design(s) that emerged, & what we observed about it. [[Have courage]].
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ''Woo hoo! Award for bravery to [[User:Jason Clutterbuck]]. --[[User:Warwick Irwin|Wal]] 23:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)''
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Week 2 ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | The [[Frogs design]] appeared, and it was beautiful.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Or was it? Slowly, painfully, the latent forces of evil were teased out. As [[User:Yugan Yugaraja]] put it:
| + | |
| − | * [[Avoid becomes]] - ''Frog'' phases of life are modeled by inheritance: ''Egg'' ''Tadpole'', ''AdultFrog''.
| + | |
| − | * [[Beware type switches]] - the ''phase'' variable in ''Frog'' is based on the type of an object (''Frog'').
| + | |
| − | * [[Beware value switches]] - the ''swim()'' method in ''Tadpole'' differs in behavior based on the value of an attribute (''type'').
| + | |
| − | * [[Avoid no-op overrides]] ("Design by Contract") - the derived class ''Egg'' overrides the base class's ''hop()'' and ''swim()'' methods with methods which does nothing.
| + | |
| − | * [[One key abstraction]] - the ''Move'' interface contains more than one key abstraction. It contains methods to move such as ''hop()'' and ''swim()'', but it also contains a ''display()'' method which is a separate key abstraction.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Badness was detected in the following two features, but the reasons remained unclear:
| + | |
| − | * ''Toad'' is a subclass of ''AdultFrog''.
| + | |
| − | * ''FrogBrain'' contains an array of ''Egg''.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | And we didn't even get to find out how confused we were by the question:
| + | |
| − | * Should a ''Frog'' be able to export itself?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | But then, lurching violently in a different direction, we tried to make a [[427 design standard]] but primarily managed to make [[Getters and setters]] look more confusing than they did before. The [[Encapsulation boundary]] problem was the cause of the grief.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Week 3 ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | * Some talk was talked about the assignment, and people were encouraged to create [[Project ideas]].
| + | |
| − | * [[Greg Searle's project blackjack]] appeared as an example.
| + | |
| − | * We hung out in the lab, in a failed attempt to animate the dead tissue of the wiki.
| + | |
| − | * The ''export yourself'' question of the [[Frogs design]] led to discovering the inherent tension between [[Separation of concerns]] and [[Keep related data and behaviour together]].
| + | |
| − | * The separating force was reinforced by [One key abstraction]] and the [[Single responsibility principle]].
| + | |
| − | * The [[Visitor pattern]] sprung forth like a superhero to save the day, leading to [[A froggy visitor]].
| + | |
| − | * Some inconclusive muttering about equals and [[Shallow and deep copy]] took place.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Week 4 ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | * [[Model view controller]] was sung about and decomposed to the [[Observer pattern]] and the [[Strategy pattern]].
| + | |
| − | * [[Johnson and Foote 1988]] was dangled like a carrot of influential OO goodness -- with particular relevance to [[Getters and setters]] debates.
| + | |
| − | * (In an earlier lecture we also met [[Ken Auer 1995]] who had a lot to say about [[Getters and setters]].)
| + | |
| − | * The [[Are you gonna eat that]] system was designed and criticised.
| + | |
| − | * [[Model the real world]] loomed large.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Week 5 ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | * We attempted Question 1 of the 2007 exam (see the [[Exam questions]] page.
| + | |
| − | **[[Balancing forces]] seemed important.
| + | |
| − | * We encountered the [[State machine design]] problem.
| + | |
| − | ** [[Tell, don't ask]] proved enlightening.
| + | |
| − | ** We spotted a [[Parallel hierarchies problem]].
| + | |
| − | * Students were asked to prepare a brief presentation for the next lecture.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Week 6 ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Um. I forget. (Help!)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Maybe:
| + | |
| − | * Students presented their own OO wisdom contributions. (What, exactly?)
| + | |
| − | * We divided into groups to look at some students' design studies.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == Week 7 ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | * We did a [[Parse tree design]]
| + | |
This is a record of some real and imagined events that occurred during 427 lecture times.
