Comments for CSCI E-168 http://e168f07.7fff.com Building Web-based Software with Ruby and Ruby on Rails Sat, 19 May 2012 02:02:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 Comment on Assignment 1; due Sep. 30 by Erik Mallinson http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-1-due-by-26-sep/#comment-163 Erik Mallinson Sat, 27 Oct 2007 18:04:57 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-1-due-by-26-sep/#comment-163 Here's a starter pager on Leopard and Rails: http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/10/26/today-is-leopard-day I haven't tried it yet (as I yet to have Leopard yet) but if you're upgrading and wonder if it's compatible with the class requirements this would be the place to start - http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/10/26/today-is-leopard-day Here’s a starter pager on Leopard and Rails:
http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/10/26/today-is-leopard-day

I haven’t tried it yet (as I yet to have Leopard yet) but if you’re upgrading and wonder if it’s compatible with the class requirements this would be the place to start - http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/10/26/today-is-leopard-day

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by john http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-158 john Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:20:27 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-158 Sagi: You are right, but if you use "rake test" it doesn't cause an error, because the constants are defined in one of the other tests. But I will fix it nonetheless. Sagi: You are right, but if you use “rake test” it doesn’t cause an error, because the constants are defined in one of the other tests.

But I will fix it nonetheless.

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by sagi http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-157 sagi Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:39:41 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-157 Regarding the latest revision of assignment 3: there's a missing declaration in tc_hand.rb : CARD = Card Regarding the latest revision of assignment 3:
there’s a missing declaration in tc_hand.rb :

CARD = Card

]]> Comment on Ruby-ize this by john http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/10/12/ruby-ize-this/#comment-155 john Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:18:38 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/10/12/ruby-ize-this/#comment-155 Clarity. Good one-liners are clear (the assignment was a special case where we emphasized one-liner-ness over clarity). If a one-liner starts to edge towards cloudiness, bring in the sun, and expand it to multiple lines. Clarity.

Good one-liners are clear (the assignment was a special case where we emphasized one-liner-ness over clarity). If a one-liner starts to edge towards cloudiness, bring in the sun, and expand it to multiple lines.

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by john http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-154 john Sun, 14 Oct 2007 23:13:45 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-154 I hope to catch up on a number of little issues with Assignment #3, include the tests that exercise <=>. There is a 90% probability that the test on <=> will go away . . . I hope to catch up on a number of little issues with Assignment #3, include the tests that exercise < =>. There is a 90% probability that the test on < => will go away . . .

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by Trung http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-153 Trung Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:44:45 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-153 The above comment is for the spaceship method in card. :) The above comment is for the spaceship method in card. :)

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by Trung http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-152 Trung Sun, 14 Oct 2007 03:43:57 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-152 In Card, we supposed to create a def for that satisfies "The passed-in object is assumed to expose a card_number method duck-style." Does this means "card_number" is expected to belong to the passed-in object? Or, via duck-style, check if "card_number" method is there? If the latter, then if the "card_number" is not present, then what do we supposed to return (since spaceship's only valid return values are -1, 0, and 1)? In Card, we supposed to create a def for that satisfies “The passed-in object is assumed to expose a card_number method duck-style.”

Does this means “card_number” is expected to belong to the passed-in object? Or, via duck-style, check if “card_number” method is there? If the latter, then if the “card_number” is not present, then what do we supposed to return (since spaceship’s only valid return values are -1, 0, and 1)?

]]> Comment on Ruby-ize this by rainyglade http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/10/12/ruby-ize-this/#comment-151 rainyglade Sat, 13 Oct 2007 11:04:29 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/10/12/ruby-ize-this/#comment-151 Just curious, is it better to go for clarity in code, or for something totally obscure that fits into a one-liner? I'm thinking in particular about a nested if statement. If put into a conditional within a conditional, the result could be very confusing, while the nested if structure seems more clear. Just curious, is it better to go for clarity in code, or for something totally obscure that fits into a one-liner? I’m thinking in particular about a nested if statement. If put into a conditional within a conditional, the result could be very confusing, while the nested if structure seems more clear.

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by john http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-150 john Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:16:29 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-150 Darryl: That sounds like a bug. I will look at it. Darryl: That sounds like a bug. I will look at it.

]]> Comment on Assignment 3; due Oct. 21 by Darryl http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-149 Darryl Fri, 12 Oct 2007 22:02:00 +0000 http://e168f07.7fff.com/2007/07/31/assignment-3/#comment-149 ...and in tc_hand.rb, def test_0195_hand_strength_025 generates a low ace straight flush, which the test expects to just be a flush. …and in tc_hand.rb, def test_0195_hand_strength_025 generates a low ace straight flush, which the test expects to just be a flush.

]]>