CompSci 108 - 2005

System Design

Reflection:

1) What parts of each problem were not clear?

Initially, we were unclear as to how far we were supposed to take the problem. We were given the shipyard- we weren't sure how detailed our model had to be, or if it just had to model the overall system. Given enough time, one can micromanage the complexity of a shipyard down to individual people. How many layers of abstractions did we need?

2) What assumptions did your group make to solve the problem?

As related to the problem above, we assumed that we only had to design the generic system. We also assumed that each part would work as intended- we did not allow for errors in the shipyard process.

3) How productive was your group experience?

Our group experience was very productive. Everyone had no problems voicing their opinions on the shipyard process.

4) How could you have made the experience better?

We ran into a sort of language barrier. Two of our group members had only programmed in Java. In addition to stylistically being different, apparently this fundamentally changed the way one could approach the problem. It would have been helpful to know both languages, then choose the strategy which optimizes the solution given the context of the shipyard.

5) What, if any, roles or patterns of interactions emerged within your group?

There were no formalized "roles" within the group. This assignment was small and open enough where everyone took part and played many different roles- given the nature of the assignment, this seemed optimal, rather than pigeonhole people into specific categories, everyone could contribute where they saw fit.