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

Team B.A.M.F.'s Cases

Course Overview

What worked effectively?

The course really drilled home responsibility driven design as well as Object Oriented driven programming. Our team enjoyed Smalltalk and what that brought to the project. The TA's input really helped us improve not only on our design but our programming.

What did not work effectively?

Visualworks just wasn't a friendly IDE. It crashes often and some of the errors just don't give you enough information to make it easy to solve. We think that the design parts of the class wasn't discussed in depth enough for my knowledge. Our entire group attended class everyday and yet none of us really understood all of the concepts we needed to know for our design homework and projects.

What could have been better?

If at all possible, if we can have a different IDE it would work much easier. Also our group believes that the design portion of the class could be taught with more examples and there could be more homeworks that would give us more practice with the design portion of the class. This would help future classes since 2340 will become the marquee design class as opposed to 2335.

M1

What worked effectively?

The TA's were really helpful with helping us have an idea as to what to do. Our TA definitely helped us go in the right direction. This process helped us realize the needs for our program as well as point out potential pitfalls in our design.

What did not work effectively?

It was very hard for our team to understand the requirements necessary for the program. We didn't like the fact that the requirements weren't layed out in a matrix format for us to evaluate. We also didn't like the references to the ectropic site because it was misleading.

What could have been better?

It would have worked better had we had a list of requirements and point value. We realize that this is not what we would receive in the industry. We also would have preferred better dates for the due dates. It seemed that it coincided with so many other classes that it made it hard to complete.

M2

What worked effectively?

The fact that we needed to make the Class diagrams definitely made us realize the needs for our program. The scenario diagrams were a big help to understanding the functionality of our program. Furthermore the trust boundaries and the application object description helped us decipher the coding portion of the program.

What did not work effectively?

The scenario diagram wasn't really explained in the class. It was hard for our team to be able to pick a single function to run all the way through. Our team didn't like that the project was similar to what we were trying to code. It actually made it confusing to describe verbally.

What could have been better?

It would have been better to have the sequence diagrams described more often during class. It also would have worked better had there been more descriptive requirement list.

M3
What worked effectively?

Our UI was laid out very well and was easy to implement with detailed drawn out layouts. Connecting the front end and back end was easily done when one member finished the GUI and another member coding the back-end. This allowed GUIís and back-end programming to be coded simultaneously until the coding was done.

What did not work effectively?

Although, our UI was laid out well, many key elements were looked over. These had to be made on the fly which made are initial layout of the GUI somewhat useless.

What could have been better?

Better planning of the key functionality needed in the program would have cut down the programming time. By looking over completely on what the program needed, the team can focus on extra credit earlier.

M4

What worked effectively?

Having almost all of the GUIís created in M3 cut down a lot on the design phase of the project. Only a small amount of tweaking was needed.

What did not work effectively?

We didnít notice the large amount of work that was associated with M4. The small amount of time caused us to do a lot of cramming.

What could have been better?

Read over each milestone early in the course so that the group can effectively divvy up the work as to not cause cramming. The amount of coding required for this was somewhat overwhelming. Better documentation would have been better also.

M5

What worked effectively?

We chose a heuristic style that was easy yet effective to evaluate the team. We also took screenshots of the other teams work to put into our project and to help us evaluate the team better when we were writing the paper incase we forgot what certain screens look like.

What did not work effectively?

We didnít know whether we needed at least three pages of evaluation or three pages was the maximum. Our screenshots (which we used to back up our evaluation) pushed our paper to over three pages.

What could have been better?

If there was a universal style to evaluate each teamís UI.

Link to this Page