Last week, our group had a meeting to prepare for the CG1102 project presentation. The main purpose of this meeting is that each member has to share ideas about how the design should be, discuss with each other to assign equal tasks for everyone.
This project basically aims to introduce us with the CEG Hypermarket Inventory Control and Monitoring System (CICMS). Typically, our task is to deal with a large multi-national supermarket chain with millions of different products, and the design we create should enable users to do some kind of functionalities like manage products, update database and generate some Statistics.
After discussion, all of us agreed to create a design that fulfil all requirements. First of all, we need to create a class Product which should include some attributes and some methods to call the calculation. Then, a class ProductDatabase will be created, storing an unlimited number of products by using Linked List. Later, we divide all the functions needed into three classes, all of them will inherit from the class ProductDatabase. Finally, the class User Interface will make use of all the classes mentioned to prompt the user for actions.
About task allocation, I will be in charge of the first two classes, Product and ProductDatabase while Cornelius will manage the three classes of functionality. Lastly, Eno will do the user interface class. Actually, all of us find this project challenging. The reason for this is that though the design seems well-defined enough, it is the corporation between each member that matters. Mostly, because we don’t need to know other’s implementation due to the purpose of ADT( Abstract Data Type), it is really crucial to have very clear specification for each functionality as well as UI class.
Personally, I think that our meeting still miss some key points. While the design is overall good, we haven’t declared clearly how each class will interact with each other. Part of the reason arise from the fact that some descriptions of functions required is still sketchy so we are quite confused about some specifications, but I think that in the near future, all of us should need more time to work together to make our design better.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The post was certainly clear and concise, it explained the task very well as well as the methods you are going to employ to resolve it. Your role in the group as well as the task you are to take on is also well defined. I would like to suggest that perhaps you could elaborate more on the process of communication as well as the interactions between your group members. What sort of hand gestures did they use, did they raise their voices to elaborate a point, perhaps they leaned forward when listening attentively? Lastly, a short paragraph on how you might improve group discussion through employing communication skills would be helpful.
ReplyDeleteDear Duc,
ReplyDeleteI must agree with you that the interaction between the different classes is not very clear. This is because there's 3 different people writing the whole code. That is where our communication comes in. We need to specify what are the parameters and what are the end results while caring less on the implementation(ADT style).
To achieve this, we need to draw out more time as what you said and also, to test out the program itself and find its flaws. Nothing is perfect in the first try. We'll always need to constantly find the potholes in our program.
Regards,
Mohd Ferrino
Dear Duc,
ReplyDeleteI think you have written a good post. I agree with you guys that this lab is much more challenging than the first three.And it's good when you realized that you missed some key points, like Erino said, nothing is perfect, so realized mistakes and fix them is important!
Cheers,
Duy.
Hey Duc,
ReplyDeleteYour post explains how well and clearly you divided the task for the assignment. It shows that the work was going smoothly during your meeting.
However, I feel that your post just gives the description of what was discussed in the meeting and not the analyses of the teamwork and communication during the session.
Perhaps you could have written more on your view and analyses in the post.
Cheers
Geetika
Dear Duc,
ReplyDeleteThis post was well written and it clearly explains the aim of the project and what was discussed during the meeting. This means that you have kept to your agenda of your meeting and not sidetracked, which is commendable. I think it is also good that you manage to reflect on your meeting and find out your team’s weak points.
However, I find that this post is rather descriptive. Maybe you could add in some of your own opinions about your group members, like their strong and weak points. You can write about logistics problems too, like faulty equipment or finding a suitable room for a meeting.
Cheers
Michael