CST338 Project 1 review

 Project 1 Review: Legally Distinct Pocket Monster

1. I worked with Anthony Martinez and Christopher Buenrostro. 

2. My strategy for solving the assignment: I first read the assignment all the way through, and setup stubs for all methods that are needed. This way code will compile even if it's not passing tests. Then I write the code as I follow the logic of the methods. then I iterate and check the test cases until everything is complete.

3. Their Strategy: They also read everything first but took a class-by-class approach. As a result, they couldn’t test until everything was done. They thought this deferred bugfixing until the end instead of as they went, and this might have made things more difficult than if they had done otherwise.

4. I would not change my approach unless I also have to write tests too. the order of adding tests first or later depends on how well the projct is specified in advance.

5. How well did I follow the style guide? No major issues, except for some missing @Override tags.

1. I do know we can automate the style rules! I use something like this in every IDE I use for every language. Linters are the best.

6. Most challenging part of this assignment was following the branching requirements. I usually branch by what functionality is implemented, irrespective of what classes/methods are implemented.

7. What was the most interesting: The way the defense points calcuation was setup was interesting. I would think this would be implemented in the concrete classes, not in the abstract class. Or better would be another abstract class for a monster with a particular element type.

8. What was I most proud of: I’m proud of getting it done on time and under budget! I also like my refactor of the defense modifiers and learning how to make a static map for a class.

9. How did I celebrate: I played some branded pocket monsters on nintendo! No gaming until the work is done.