At 11:30 AM 3/27/2009 -0500, kirby urner wrote:
PyWhip is moving in the same direction.
Using unittest is another option (instead of doctest).
So far, I've been able to get doctest to do anything I need in testing, even some fairly complex tests involving multiple functions, pre-test setup, post-test analysis, etc. The unittest module feels more like a tool for professional programmers working on a big Java project. Even with all that complex setup, you still need doctests, so you'll end up doing both. doctest is cool, because the learning barrier is zero! Test your function by calling it from the >>> prompt. Cut and paste to the function's docstring, and your doctest is complete.
So Croquant is like a delivery tool, where the lesson plans accumulate. PyWhip is similar but more static (making the content Wiki based is likely to promote organic growth).
Not quite sure what you mean here. Could you be more specific? Anyone can contribute problems to PyWhip, including students. I expect we will have a huge accumulation, and the final quality will be determined by how well we chose the best, and how well get these collections organized into a good learning sequence. Currently PyWhip more like Citizendium than Wikipedia. Teachers (editors) control the content. We are talking about expanding this to allow anyone to be a teacher, and register a setup. Students who select that setup, will then see whatever problems their teacher wants them to see. -- Dave
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 12:26 PM, David MacQuigg <macquigg@ece.arizona.edu> wrote: << SNIP >>
So Croquant is like a delivery tool, where the lesson plans accumulate. PyWhip is similar but more static (making the content Wiki based is likely to promote organic growth).
Not quite sure what you mean here. Could you be more specific?
Anyone can contribute problems to PyWhip, including students. I expect we will have a huge accumulation, and the final quality will be determined by how well we chose the best, and how well get these collections organized into a good learning sequence.
Given I'm just taking notes here, I shouldn't claim to speak for Andre, so I won't, but here's my own understanding: Croquant is, like MoinMoin, a wiki framework anyone might download and host anywhere, while Crunchy is a client-side program that again runs on any compatible platform. Crunchy is especially happy "eating" Croquant's wiki pages (if marked up the right way). In this model, there's no control over control, i.e. as with Python itself there's no saying what people will do with it. Anyone can run/host either/both products. Is PyWhip the same way? Is the source code in svn. It's a closed source Google Appengine with a specific URL, is how I look at it today. Wrong model?
Currently PyWhip more like Citizendium than Wikipedia. Teachers (editors) control the content. We are talking about expanding this to allow anyone to be a teacher, and register a setup. Students who select that setup, will then see whatever problems their teacher wants them to see.
Wikipedia is a specific (special case) implementation of the wiki framework, so if PyWhip is like a *specific* wiki, then it's less like Croquant? Does PyWhip run the student code on the server or on the client? Sorry I'm unclear. Andre was basically giving free publicity to PyWhip, spoke of it with admiration, but wanted to explain how his own project with not quite the same concept. I'm still getting clear on the specific differences myself, so any inaccuracies are mine. Thanks in advance for correcting any misconceptions I may had. Kirby
-- Dave
_______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list Edu-sig@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
participants (2)
-
David MacQuigg -
kirby urner