CST 338 Week 5

 Making Gibberish with Markov

Working on the review of the Markov assignment was done in collaboration with my classmates from TerraBit Solutions, a team formed in CST300 with Saria Kabbour, Gary Kuepper, and Jess Hammond. Our evaluation of each others code, provided insight into our diverse approach to problem-solving. I employed pseudocode and integrated the assignment brief into the code as comments, using it as a framework. This structured approach helped me stay organized and ensured that I didn't miss any important details.

Saria, on the other hand, preferred to plan out her solution first. She sketched out the UML diagrams and mapped out the relationships between the different classes and methods before writing any code. Gary’s strategy was to start writing code right away, iterating and refining it as he went. Jess took a middle-ground approach, combining elements of planning and immediate coding. He wrote down key methods and their expected behavior, then implemented them while incrementally testing and debugging.

While pseudocode and in-code comments provide a solid framework, taking some time to plan out the structure on paper, could help in visualizing complex interactions and dependencies. Additionally, iterative coding and testing could help in catching errors early and refining the solution more effectively.

According to my classmates, my code adheres reasonably well to the Google Java Style Guide. However, there were areas for improvement, such as more consistent use of proper and clear documentation. We discussed how automated tools can help enforce these style guide rules, making it easier to maintain clean and readable code. Configuring IntelliJ IDEA to apply Google’s style guide can be incredibly helpful in ensuring code consistency and adherence to best practices.