[python-uk] python-uk Digest, Vol 73, Issue 19

greg nwosu gregsdev at googlemail.com
Mon Sep 28 20:59:10 CEST 2009


During the dojo its most likely that you will encounter an implementation
detail that does not agree with you.
In this situation (as in most implementation scenarios) you'll have to weigh
up the costs of refactoring the code vs trudging along with it , given a
very tight timeframe and a nagging desire to complete and (in my case) a
need for cohesion that borders on autism.

bear in mind that refactoring will most likely break tests, and it would be
my first priority to fix any tests that I broke during my refactoring.

Its not good cricket to leave the build worse than you found it


On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 12:45 PM, <python-uk-request at python.org> wrote:

> Send python-uk mailing list submissions to
>        python-uk at python.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        python-uk-request at python.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        python-uk-owner at python.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of python-uk digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October 2009 at     Fry-IT
>      (Nicholas Tollervey)
>   2. Re: 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October 2009 at Fry-IT
>      (Michael Foord)
>   3. Re: 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October 2009        at
>  Fry-IT
>      (Jon Ribbens)
>   4. Re: 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October 2009        at Fry-IT
>      (Michael Foord)
>   5. Re: 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October 2009        at Fry-IT
>      (Jonathan Hartley)
>   6. Re: 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October 2009        at Fry-IT
>      (Jonathan Hartley)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 11:55:13 +0100
> From: Nicholas Tollervey <ntoll at ntoll.org>
> To: UK Python Users <python-uk at python.org>
> Subject: Re: [python-uk] 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October
>        2009 at Fry-IT
> Message-ID: <61BB3D9B-0EC6-45E1-831A-7AC0B26866B5 at ntoll.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> Paul,
>
> Thanks for the feedback!
>
> By shared learning outcome I'm assuming you mean a specific skill or
> item of knowledge that has been explained and practiced/exercised
> during the dojo? If so, then the honest answer is no, we don't have
> specific learning outcomes defined.
>
> I suspect this is due to the way in which the tic-tac-toe problem was
> arrived at during the plenary at the end of the last dojo. Thinking
> back, it strikes me we were evaluating suggestions in terms of their
> difficulty (or lack thereof) and "fun". Activities and problems were
> suggested and a consensus arrived at. I don't think this lack of
> learning focus is a problem as I believe learning will emerge from the
> general chaos that will ensue.
>
> Nevertheless Paul, you have prompted a question: how do we decide what
> to do next..?
>
> At the end of the next meeting we (as a group) could do two things:
> choose an activity on its own merit (fun, skill level,
> "interestingness", whatever) as we did last time *or* choose an
> activity because of its usefulness in exploring a "deeper" problem,
> skill or topic (for example, finding out about binary search trees
> with a "20 questions" game).
>
> Perhaps something to think about before next time..? Bonus points for
> suggestions and examples. ;-)
>
> Finally, http://www.pythonchallenge.com/ has always struck me as a fun
> thing to do in a group with the simple aim of expanding one's
> knowledge of Python's capabilities and libraries. Perhaps something
> fun for a Xmas "special"..?
>
> As always, comments, suggestions, feedback and ideas most welcome.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Nicholas.
>
> On 27 Sep 2009, at 22:29, Paul Nasrat wrote:
>
> > 2009/9/24 Bruce Durling <bld at otfrom.com>:
> >> We all enjoyed the last dojo so much we decided to have another one.
> >> Fry-IT are hosting again.
> >>
> >> There is a sign up and information page here:
> >>
> >> http://ldnpydojo.eventwax.com/2nd-london-python-dojo
> >>
> >> We're doing tic-tac-toe (noughts and crosses) with and AI opponent.
> >>
> >
> > I've looked through the skeletal code on github and that looks like a
> > good start.
> >
> > Do we have a shared objective for what we are trying to get out of the
> > dojo in terms of learning?
> >
> > Paul
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-uk mailing list
> > python-uk at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:09:48 +0100
> From: Michael Foord <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk>
> To: UK Python Users <python-uk at python.org>
> Subject: Re: [python-uk] 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October
>        2009 at Fry-IT
> Message-ID: <4AC0997C.7000807 at voidspace.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Nicholas Tollervey wrote:
> > [snip...]
> > Finally, http://www.pythonchallenge.com/ has always struck me as a fun
> > thing to do in a group with the simple aim of expanding one's
> > knowledge of Python's capabilities and libraries. Perhaps something
> > fun for a Xmas "special"..?
> >
>
> This sounds like a great idea.
>
> Michael
>
> > As always, comments, suggestions, feedback and ideas most welcome.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Nicholas.
> >
> > On 27 Sep 2009, at 22:29, Paul Nasrat wrote:
> >
> >> 2009/9/24 Bruce Durling <bld at otfrom.com>:
> >>> We all enjoyed the last dojo so much we decided to have another one.
> >>> Fry-IT are hosting again.
> >>>
> >>> There is a sign up and information page here:
> >>>
> >>> http://ldnpydojo.eventwax.com/2nd-london-python-dojo
> >>>
> >>> We're doing tic-tac-toe (noughts and crosses) with and AI opponent.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I've looked through the skeletal code on github and that looks like a
> >> good start.
> >>
> >> Do we have a shared objective for what we are trying to get out of the
> >> dojo in terms of learning?
> >>
> >> Paul
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> python-uk mailing list
> >> python-uk at python.org
> >> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-uk mailing list
> > python-uk at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
>
>
> --
> http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
> http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:28:32 +0100
> From: Jon Ribbens <jon+python-uk at unequivocal.co.uk<jon%2Bpython-uk at unequivocal.co.uk>
> >
> To: python-uk at python.org
> Subject: Re: [python-uk] 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October
>        2009    at      Fry-IT
> Message-ID: <20090928112832.GQ23367 at snowy.squish.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:29:33PM +0100, Paul Nasrat wrote:
> > I've looked through the skeletal code on github and that looks like a
> > good start.
>
> The lines in the test code which look like this:
>
>    assert state == [ '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', ]
>
> are somewhat making the assumption that the board state object will
> not be immutable.
>
> Also I'd like to put in a strong vote for part of the spec being that
> the game will allow human v human, human v computer, or computer v
> computer games (by entering "number of players: zero" ;-) )
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:30:05 +0100
> From: Michael Foord <fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk>
> To: python-uk at python.org
> Subject: Re: [python-uk] 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October
>        2009    at Fry-IT
> Message-ID: <4AC09E3D.1070703 at voidspace.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Jon Ribbens wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:29:33PM +0100, Paul Nasrat wrote:
> >
> >> I've looked through the skeletal code on github and that looks like a
> >> good start.
> >>
> >
> > The lines in the test code which look like this:
> >
> >     assert state == [ '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', ]
> >
> > are somewhat making the assumption that the board state object will
> > not be immutable.
> >
> > Also I'd like to put in a strong vote for part of the spec being that
> > the game will allow human v human, human v computer, or computer v
> > computer games (by entering "number of players: zero" ;-) )
> >
> I think we should start simple. We can always expand the spec if we
> complete the task... (highly unlikely in my opinion)
>
> Michael
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-uk mailing list
> > python-uk at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
> >
>
>
> --
> http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
> http://www.voidspace.org.uk/blog
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:37:31 +0100
> From: Jonathan Hartley <tartley at tartley.com>
> To: python-uk at python.org
> Subject: Re: [python-uk] 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October
>        2009    at Fry-IT
> Message-ID: <4AC09FFB.6080203 at tartley.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> inline
>
> Jon Ribbens wrote:
> > Also I'd like to put in a strong vote for part of the spec being that
> > the game will allow human v human, human v computer, or computer v
> > computer games (by entering "number of players: zero" ;-) )
> >
> We talked about this during the dojo planning meetup last week. We all
> had great interest in this idea and pursued it for some 40 minutes or
> so. However, we reluctantly decided to scrap it because we couldn't
> figure out a simple way of enabling it without providing intrusive
> frameworks of code to channel the direction of the dojo participants.
>
> If you can figure out a way, I'd be open to the discussion, but I'd be
> wary that we might simply be retreading the discussion that was already
> had.
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Hartley      Made of meat.      http://tartley.com
> tartley at tartley.com   +44 7737 062 225   twitter/skype: tartley
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:45:43 +0100
> From: Jonathan Hartley <tartley at tartley.com>
> To: python-uk at python.org
> Subject: Re: [python-uk] 2nd London Python Dojo - 18:30 15 October
>        2009    at Fry-IT
> Message-ID: <4AC0A1E7.7090807 at tartley.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> again!
>
> Jonathan Hartley wrote:
> > inline
> >
> > Jon Ribbens wrote:
> >> Also I'd like to put in a strong vote for part of the spec being that
> >> the game will allow human v human, human v computer, or computer v
> >> computer games (by entering "number of players: zero" ;-) )
> >>
> > We talked about this during the dojo planning meetup last week. We all
> > had great interest in this idea and pursued it for some 40 minutes or
> > so. However, we reluctantly decided to scrap it because we couldn't
> > figure out a simple way of enabling it without providing intrusive
> > frameworks of code to channel the direction of the dojo participants.
> >
> > If you can figure out a way, I'd be open to the discussion, but I'd be
> > wary that we might simply be retreading the discussion that was
> > already had.
>
> Having said that, I realise with a moment's reflection that we were
> somewhat transfixed by the probably misleading initial suggestion
> (mine?) that a single process should play as one player, and that to see
> computer-to-computer matches we should wire up the stdin of one process
> to the stdout of another.
>
> Your framing of the problem as a single process playing against itself
> is doubtless more straightforward and simpler to implement (although it
> lacks the aspect that I found most appealing of allowing matches between
> differing implementations.) However, your version may have the advantage
> of actually being achievable from a blank slate in the very limited time
> available.
>
> However I feel like a dojo is good for practising technique,
> test-driven, design, refactoring, and as we saw last time, having a
> subject matter which puts us under time pressure does somewhat force all
> these things out of the window, since people feel under pressure to make
> progress towards the ambitious goal. So I would vote for having the
> simplest dojo we can possibly persuade ourselves to accept, at least
> until we find out feet.
>
>    Jonathan
>
> --
> Jonathan Hartley      Made of meat.      http://tartley.com
> tartley at tartley.com   +44 7737 062 225   twitter/skype: tartley
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> python-uk mailing list
> python-uk at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
>
>
> End of python-uk Digest, Vol 73, Issue 19
> *****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-uk/attachments/20090928/3edd07f2/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the python-uk mailing list