CST 338 Wk04: Learning Journal Project 1 review

With whom did you work?

I worked with Ethan, Liam and Matthias. C

What was your strategy for solving the assignments?

I built the abstract class first, then implemented the specific monster subclasses as part of my approach to the LDPM assignment. I appropriately put up the structure using the UML diagram. I concentrated on the tests after creating a general schedule of every lesson. My reasoning was aided by the test file, particularly in sections like attack(), setPhrase(), and takeDamage(). In light of the test findings, I debugged and improved.

Did you start writing code right away? Did you plan it out on paper?

I used method stubs and inline TODO comments to plan inside IntelliJ rather than on paper. Before implementing the methods in order of difficulty, I started by writing the class skeletons. I checked the output frequently to ensure accuracy and used the test class as a checklist.

What was THEIR strategy for solving the assignments?

Ethan addressed the need of carefully understanding the prompt and developing the program step-by-step using method descriptions. Liam followed a different approach, first setting up all class structures and then switching between methods as necessary to solve issues that arose throughout the testing. Passing the test file and precisely matching the sample output were their top priorities.

How would you change your strategy having worked on the assignment?

The test file really helped me grasp the anticipated behavior for each procedure, thus I would definitely spend more time going over it beforehand. Additionally, I would be more careful to provide helper methods early in the process and identify edge circumstances.

According to your classmate(s): how well does your code follow the Google Java Style Guide?

According to my classmates, my source code and test file generally adhere to the style standards. I titled methods in lowerCamelCase, used @Override when necessary, and consistently indented text by two spaces. Clearer Javadoc and removing unnecessary blank lines were two things Liam did suggest. Ethan found my approaches to be easily accessible and well-separated.

Did you know you can automate applying some of the style guide rules?

Yes, After importing the Google Style XML into IntelliJ, I auto-formatted the code by pressing Ctrl + Alt + L. Maintaining uniform brace placement and indentation was greatly aided by this.

What was the most challenging part?

The most difficult element was putting the reasoning underlying attack() and setType() into practice, making ensuring that the result met the expectations of the tests and that elemental type restrictions existed. It required several tries and a great deal of troubleshooting to get those conditions correct.

What was the most interesting?

Working more dynamically using object-oriented principles was cool. The project seemed more like actual game development because to the use of inheritance, polymorphism, and type-based reasoning. Writing and executing tests that genuinely indicated whether your code was functional was also gratifying.

What are you the most proud of?

My handling of the MonsterTest file makes me proud. It is well-organized, tests all necessary procedures, and passes when compared to an accurate implementation. Additionally, I'm proud that I wrote my classes to pass them without altering the test logic.

How did you celebrate completing the assignment?

I submitted it, took a little break. After all of the testing and fine-tuning, the little respite seemed well-earned.