4 ms·
> They are tedious, but for the wrong reasons: you have to make a lot of guesses on what are exactly the semantics of what you're supposed to implement, sifting
by prawks 13y ago
> They are tedious, but for the wrong reasons: you have to make a lot of guesses on what are exactly the semantics of what you're supposed to implement, sifting through the forum and the FAQ for relevant information.
I look at their exercises more from a "I'll do it until I feel I have learned the core concepts" rather than "I'll do it until the grader gives me 100%".
If you're not taking the course for credit, your goal should be learning, not grades. That's what it's all about for me, and learning reactive/functional/Scala programming has little to do with debugging a black box of a grading system.
(Totally agree for those people who paid to receive credit, it must be very frustrating at times)
- skwirl 13y agoIf the lectures do not do a good job of teaching the material and the assignments do not actually do a good job of testing your understanding of the material, what is the point of the course? I think epsylon is accurately presenting the prevailing opinion of the course. It's not very good and is a time sink for all the wrong reasons. If the grader is marking you off on a certain aspect of the assignment, how do you know you have actually learned the core concepts? How do you know you aren't missing something important? The problem with "doing it until I feel I have learned the core concepts" is that I don't know what I don't know (unknown unknowns). That's part of why a structured course is supposed to be valuable, because it doesn't let me skip important concepts. This course can be salvaged the second time around, but it is going to require a bit of polishing.
- platz 13y agoThe only one that drove me a little nuts was the demux assignment, but I thought Meijer's videos were fine and haven't had the grader problems others have had (yet).