full house. Then I imported them to play.py so they would be integrated into the game.
OOP felt more comfortable than the data science problems, but was more challenging than the drawing projects
since the feedback again is not visual. However, this feels like a middle ground between the two. I think that the
use of something familiar, like Yahtzee was a huge help in this proess. I can conceptialize the adjustments I am
making becasue I have done them before. Additionally, it felt like the steps for the game itself were very confusing,
but the goals were managable. I understood how to piece together the goals and make the applicable. Looking ahead,
I am anticipating the challenge of building out a game of my own. This is going to be a challenge! The part of OOP
that I related to was the confines given (a game, a die, a goal) then the challenge being operating within them to accomplish tasks.
Creating from sratch is tough! ... but not in a bad way. I will just ahve to establish my own confines/rules, then develop.
It is a challenge to create from scratch when I have not mastered the rules yet. I look forward to continuing to develop this skill!
If yahtzee was written in Unit 1, I would invision it to be well, a visual. The die itself would roll and that would act as the "roll."
That being said, the goals and steps of winning the game seem like they are a little out of reach of Unit 1. It would be the rolling of the
dice and that's it.
If this was in Unit 2, the game may have been converted into a data set. The instances may have already been run and
documented in a spreadsheet that was uploaded. Then that data would have been analyzed and plotted as data, rather than as a game. the goals could
have been evaluated as statisical instacnes to be analyzed rather than turns to be played.
methods.
1. I find this to be extremely helpful in the learning process. It is exploratory
thinking and learning, but in reverse. You are given the elements and the answers, then
asked to decipher them. Explaining what the steps mean is like teaching the steps to another
person. This is one of the ways that I have always learned best. If I teach anotehr person the
information then I am not only understanding it, but I am able to break it down
into pieces.
This would be excellent to use in a CS classroom as well. Giving student the chance to break
down an answer into pieces, then explain them to one another would be a fun means of reflection
and learning. I did find that the docstrings were easier to write when I wrote the two sets of """"
first, then tried to break down the code. It seems silly, but this way I was able to see the colors that the
words of the code were in. I realized how much that helped me to distinguish the elements from each
other.
2. I think I will use docstrings, but as I reflect, I find that in the past when I have used them that they are
informal and a little messy. I am thinking back to te drawing project. My docstrings on that project
were a little unhinged to say the least. I think if I continue to include them in the future that I need to
work on my organization and intentionality. Overall, I think that would make the entire coding process easier.
of running the same simulation but for instances where three of a kind
are rolled with five dice and four of a kind are rolled with five dice.
Classes are a really useful way to run these high probability situations.
It might be fun to run something like the odds of winning certian bets or
the odds of your lottery numbers being the correct ones. Is that legal?
Feels illegal...
Anyway, it would also be interesting to combine these simulations with data
from other labs that we have done in class. For example, the weather lab.
Could you create a simluation that has a thing (like the die or a weather event) and an environment
in which to run that thing that has certian rules based off of data?
So, for example, could you run a simulation about the liklihood of a weather event
hitting your property? Or would that be more data science (like unit 2)?
Rebecca Hankey
rhankey