Getting your pseudo-code straight

By -
Having just graded 109 two-page pseudo-code answers, I am keenly aware that students have real problems keeping straight what variables hold what type of data. The problem was to augment a red-black tree keyed on date with an energy total, and then to walk the tree to determine an energy usage between two dates. I saw lots of code doing things like:

node.left += energy
node.key = energy
T.root = total

All three of those lines of code would destroy the red-black tree by wiping out one of its structural components with auxilliary data.

It occurred to me that it might be a good idea to have students begin their work by listing each variable they will be dealing with, and what sort of thing it will hold. Then, whenever they are about to assign to it, they can check back to the "pseudo-declarations."

But I haven't seen this taught. Is anyone familiar with a place where this is recommended?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more