On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 2:16:36 PM UTC-5, new_to_c0ding wrote:
> Hello all, I have been scratching my head since morning but
> could not understand this quiz question. I would appreciate
> if someone could help me understand what is it asking me to
> do. I dont need the answer but just the right direction to
> look at.
Hello.
First of all, as i look over this "script template" that
your instructor has supposedly provided, i am disgusted by
the abysmal formatting. I'm not sure if what you provided
here is an exact replica, or something that you have
modified, but in either case, a little bit of proper
formatting can go a loooooong way towards readability.
For instance,
When writing in natural languages (such as English), we
utilize common structural elements and rules so that our
text will be presented in manner that is recognizable to
most readers. A few of these "high level structural
components" include _spaces_, _sentences_ and _paragraphs_.
And when writing code, we also utilize a "common structure".
And one of the most important components of this "common
structure" is the use of vertical whitespace. By properly
utilizing vertical whitespace, we can separate the
"paragraphs" of our code (aka: classes and functions) so
that reading the code will be more intuitive.
Of course,
Structuring code is far more complicated than simply
creating "visual buffers zones" around classes and
functions, and many hours have been spent debating what is
proper, and what is not. But being that in the "realms of
the OOP paradigm" classes and methods are the most
fundamental elements, it should come as no surprise that
mastering the formatting of these elements is a vital first
lesson.
Now,
Even though there is something of an "ideological war"
raging as to exactly how much vertical whitespace should be
used, and _where_ it should be used, most programmers will
agree that the following example is acceptable. A common
style is to place *ONE* vertical whitespace between each
method in a class,and two vertical whitespaces between the
classes themselves. Observe the following...
## BEGIN: READABLE CODE EXAMPLE ##
class Location(object):
"""DOCSTRING MISSING!!!"""
def __init__(self, x, y):
self.x = x
self.y = y
def move(self, deltaX, deltaY):
return Location(self.x + deltaX, self.y + deltaY)
def getX(self):
return self.x
def getY(self):
return self.y
def dist_from(self, other):
xDist = self.x - other.x
yDist = self.y - other.y
return (xDist**2 + yDist**2)**0.5
def __eq__(self, other):
return (self.x == other.x and self.y == other.y)
def __str__(self):
return '<' + str(self.x) + ',' + str(self.y) + '>'
class Campus(object):
"""DOCSTRING MISSING!!!"""
def __init__(self, center_loc):
self.center_loc = center_loc
def __str__(self):
return str(self.center_loc)
class MITCampus(Campus):
""" A MITCampus is a Campus that contains tents """
def __init__(self, center_loc, tent_loc=Location(0,0)):
""" Assumes center_loc and tent_loc are Location objects
Initializes a new Campus centered at location center_loc
with a tent at location tent_loc """
# Your code here
def add_tent(self, new_tent_loc):
""" Assumes new_tent_loc is a[n *INSTANCE* of] Location
Adds new_tent_loc to the campus only if the tent is at least 0.5
distance
away from all other tents already there. Campus is unchanged otherwise.
Returns True if it could add the tent, False otherwise. """
# Your code here
def remove_tent(self, tent_loc):
""" Assumes tent_loc is a[n *INSTANCE* of] Location
Removes tent_loc from the campus.
Raises a ValueError if there is not a tent at tent_loc.
Does not return anything """
# Your code here
def get_tents(self):
""" Returns a list of all tents on the campus. The list should contain
the string representation of the Location of a tent. The list should
be sorted by the x coordinate of the location. """
# Your code here
## END: READABLE CODE EXAMPLE ##
But what is most important to remember here is _not_ so much
the _number_ of spaces used, but that the number is greater
than _zero_, and that the spacing is _consistent_. For
instance: if one feels that two spaces between methods is
more desirable then that is okay, but, one should maintain
the two space buffer between *ALL* methods in the script
*AND* furthermore, expand the buffer between classes to four
spaces -- because consistency is the key!
But this code is not only lacking an intuitive format, it is
also lacking an intelligent design. For instance: this
object model is just begging for a "Tent object" with the
Location being an attribute of each individual "Tent".
Because it makes absolutely no sense for the MITCampus
interface to present an "add_tent" method that expects a
Location object as argument. This is illogic! Because
locations are *NOT* Tents! Observe the following.
## BEGIN: SCHOOLING OF THE IDIOT PROFESSOR ##
class Tent(object):
def __init__(self, location):
if not isinstance(location, Location):
raise Exception('Expected an instance of Location!')
self.location = location
def upsticks(self, x, y):
self.location.move(x, y)
## END: SCHOOLING OF THE IDIOT PROFESSOR (for now...) ##
Now we have a proper representation of the "players" in this
"game". And should it become necessary, at some point in the
future, the "Tent" class can easily be extended to include
such natural attributes as "name" and/or a "number of
occupants" (which, depending on the needs of the model,
"occupants" could be represented using a simple integer
value (aka: tally) or a whole new Occupant class can be
created to represent each individual occupant of the Tent.)
I'm sorry to be one to inform you, but judging from the
evidence presented here, your professor is not qualified to
teach OOP principles. If One is to master the OOP paradigm,
One must always construct an object model utilizing a design
that, first and foremost, favors an ease of extensibility.
However, your professor has neglected to follow this most
fundamental of design considerations, thereby, rendering
this lesson to be nothing more than another fine example of
the blind leading the blind. Which in today's abysmal
academic atmosphere, is far more common than we'd care to
admit.
But do not allow your unfortunate academic circumstances to
discourage you. For although we have little control over who
will be our instructors, or our superiors, we will always
maintain control over own *OWN* capacity to learn. And if we
are determined to become great students of knowledge (which
i hope you are), then we must adopt an aggressive attitude
to seek out knowledge in diverse places, if necessary,
utilizing our sheer "force of will" alone. So if our
instructor is incompetent (as they all to often are), then
we will circumvent that instructors, violently kicking down
the doors of hidden knowledge, if necessary, with the
focused resolve that we will not be denied the knowledge for
which we, as human beings, deserve.
The point i'm trying to make here (with my dissection of
your professor's incompetence), is that if you want to
become competent at anything (not just writing code), you
must realize that no one can _teach_ you anything. All an
instructor can ever hope to do is to _lead_ you in a general
direction, and _hope_ that you will gleam the valuable
insights along the way. There are vast online sources where
one can study a particular field, and unlike the formal
classroom setting where you are limited by the competence
and dogma of a particular instructor, online resources allow
you to learn at rate that is comfortable to you, but more
importantly, you will be exposed to many diverse opinions
and methods of solving problems that are just not available
in the orthodox setting of the "despotic classroom". And
although, to gain your degree, you may have not choice but
to "play along" with this unqualified professor, your
knowledge need not be limited by the incompetence of the
aforementioned idiot .
Contrary to popular belief, i don't participate in online
communities to help others, no, helping others is a
secondary, and sometimes merely a consequence, of me
developing my own analytical skills. Participating in online
communities is sort of like a classroom, except that the
"environmental motivation to excel" is not a result of
dictates, but of "competition between the members". And it
should be understood that it is the _competitive_force_
which injects energy into the social equation, allowing the
cream to rise naturally to the top.
This is how our Universe operates, and the fruits of success
are all around us. Because any system that forsakes the
unlimited energy source for which competition provides, can
ever only hope to achieve mediocrity. The "ministries of
education" are where the intellectual potential and the
innovative spirit of a young mind goes to die. Please don't
allow yourself to become a victim of this malevolent
indoctrination.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
