RE: [Rails-devel] Stock market revisited

[Brett L. <wak...@ea...>]

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 3/4/2005 at 9:33 PM Erik Vos using eri...@hc... declared:

>> Being able to craft some quick test cases for moving the 
>> marker around and checking the results via console 
>> is the first end-goal for the stockmarket class.
>
>The StockChart moveXxxx() methods already write the moves to System.out,
>if that is what you want. 
>(I guess this will later be replaced by writing to a log).
>

The reason I suggest using toString() is that this will allow us to use it=
 for many other things beyond simply testing the classes.

For example, it's an easy way for us to gather reporting data about the=
 state of the game by using each objects toString() method rather than=
 polling every getFoo() method for every property within the object.


>> >1. In theory we might be able to make one StockMarket class that can
>> >handle all varieties (linear, rectangular and hexagonal)
>> >but I think we can better split up into generic and special classes.
>> 
>> As was mentioned before, linear is just rectangular with a 
>> single row. No special class needed there.
>
>I noticed that. The question still is (not just here but in general): 
>how many different variants are we prepared to cram in one class?
>Maybe I have a tendency to subclass (too) early and (too) often...
> 

Well, it's something to take on a case-by-case basis.

The big point is that in the case of linear markets, there's no need to do=
 the extra work of creating a whole new subclass because the normal=
 rectangular market will already work as a linear market without any=
 modifications.

This project is going to be complex enough, so anywhere that we can find=
 these sorts of simplifications of structure, we should take advantage of=
 them.


>> >Hexagonal is rare (I believe 1837 only) so it's special anyway.
>> >We might also consider linear stockmarkets special, because
>> >so few games have it (AFAIK only the Tresham games and 1860).
>> 
>> I wouldn't focus too much on getting a hexagonal stockmarket 
>> working just yet. So long as the generic class is 
>> capable of allowing implementation of these later, that's fine.
>
>Sure, 1837 is a *very* long term goal (frankly I'm not convinced
>that we get even 1830 out of the door, but that does not depress me.
>It's a hobby!).
>

I think that if we can set realistic milestones for ourselves, we'll get it=
 done.

Right now, I'd just like to see a working stockmarket. Once that works, we=
 can look at getting a working game map put together. After that, we'll aim=
 for a working auction for private companies.  And so on, and so on, until=
 we've got a fully working game.

We will get there. The important thing is to not let the large scope of the=
 project take away from being able to achieve each of the smaller goals=
 that, when combined, will allow us to achieve the larger project goals.=
   :-)

---Brett.