View this PageEdit this PageAttachments to this PageHistory of this PageHomeRecent ChangesSearch the SwikiHelp Guide
Hotspots: Admin Pages | Turn-in Site |
Current Links: Cases Final Project Summer 2007

Does 2330/2331 and 2340/2341 make sense?

We (Alison, Jim, Mike, me) are wondering if 2330/2331 and 2340/2341 makes sense to all of you.

We're very interested in your opinions on this. Could you please tell us what you think? Anonymous comments are just fine, but so are named comments so that we can follow up with you if we have further questions.



Well, having taken 2430/3411 under quarters, I can say that this class doesn't seem too hard. The only thing I feel I'm missing is a better knowledge of Squeak =) However, in the beginning, it took a while to get used to the structure since everything was "just like 233[0/1]." I don't feel that not having taken 2330/1 has hurt me all that much in the long run.

Oh, and while we're talking prereqs, as a side note, earlier it was mentioned that we were responsible for the material covered in CS1312. I don't see how any of the students taking 2340/1 no could have taken that course with its newer material. Granted, it was not a problem to look up potential swing questions for the exam, but going over the scenarios in my head, I find it virtually impossible for a student to be in this course and have taken the semester version. Just a small gripe.
David Jaggie

The quarter-equivalencies were supposed to be such that students in 2340 had the EQUIVALENT of 1312. I've realized that that's not the case. Mark Guzdial

I see quite a bit of connection between 2331, 2340/41. But I still do not understand how 2330 is connected to these. I mean in 2330 we were mostly learning C, LEX, YACC and stuff like that. We did not bother much about designing or anything. Well you could say that since we were dealing with a non-oo programming language, the design issues are simpler but still we were more focussed on getting the code runnning whereas in classes like 2331,41 and 40 we are trying to increse the quality of our work. I would definitely say that 2330 can be seperate but it is a very good idea that 2331,2341 and 2340 are all together.
Thirumalai Varadan

I can see the relationship between 2340 & 2341, but this may just be because I know what 2390 and 3302 were. But I remember way back when, when I first saw the semester conversion mappings, the rationale for pairing 2390 material with 3302 material and 2430 material with 3411 material was far from obvious to me. But now, I can see why things were done they way they were. I'm glad I took 234(0|1) rather than 2340+3302 since I think 2341 is less than 3302 (although most people thought 3302 was a bunny course). But I remember the first time I saw the O'Reilly book for lex & yacc in the bookstore, and thought "Wow, what class is that for... oh my! they're using that in there? That's interesting. Wish I could learn that stuff." (I'm a theory freak (hence the attraction to obscure O'Reilly books) and not interested in the real world (hence the distaste for the 3302 bunny).)