It looks like there were 2 mis-marked questions (check your e-mail). Damn, I'm going to lose points on at least one of them.

Lol, the identity question I pm'd you about. CS50x week 2 and 3 are up.

I'm def going to check that out. I always wanted to learn more about investing and this is the type of approach I would want to take.

Yeah but it's weird.

If you run the "id" function it WILL change depending on what value is contained in the variable or expression you run in it.

That clearly contradicts what the documentation says.

pset2 for cs50x is pretty much the exact same as pset5 for 6.00x. My code is soooooo much uglier in C though because I'm so much less comfortable with C than Python. Did anyone do caesar.c yet? I'm failing one test case:

The spec says to return 1 if there is no argv[1], right?

LOL

wonder if this could be applied to bitcoin markets. I've been looking for something to play around with since poker died.

I haven't started this one yet but yeah, I glanced over the pset and it definitely says to return 1 if there's 0 or more than 1 arguments passed in.

I started this one but quit when rl forced me to sit out an entire week or so. Maybe by the next time they offer it someone will have either taught them how to write a proper Python module or written it themselves. There is no reason I can fathom why a program written 100% in a cross-platform interpreted language should have a recommended windows install method of "download our custom ubuntu image and run it in Virtualbox"

@splashpot,

I just finished caesar and passed the checker. Just follow the specs closely.

My solution in c is much different than Python but I'm not sure I would say it's uglier. I didn't even use modulo with Python though.

Btw the official grades are up for mid term 1. I ended up with 87/100. The unofficial grade was 87 with the mis-marked answer. I guess I answered one question right that was marked wrong and it evened out.

I'm glad to see I wasn't the only one who had trouble with part 6. Looks like a majority of the people got rofl stomped in that section. I got almost the exact average (scored 13 with the class average being 12.67).

Yea, I got it. I know it says "yell" at the user but they should explicitly say print an error. They kind of implied in lecture that returning a 1 IS yelling at the user.

I dunno if they ended up changing the misgrades, unless I also got one wrong that was misgraded correct. I know I got the misgraded wrong answer correct. Also, I only got 1 wrong outside of section 6 (2 with the misgrade), which I agree was pretty tough.

Did you finish the Vigenere part? I'm pretty happy with how mine turned out. I also think the guys who put together cs50x put a lot more effort into teaching you how to really program.

I really feel like my C solution for both problem sets is a million times better than the Python solution but it only got to be that way because of a certain thing that cs50x did that 6.00x did not.

I just did vigenere but holy **** is my code ugly. Embarrasingly ugly. I haven't found a good C reference or at least I suck at searching the C docs. I couldn't figure out the equivalent of the following python code
so I wrote for loops to compare each and every character every time I wanted to do that. Shoe Lace, I'm def interested to see how you did it.

I think our definition of good is different. I'm not too concerned with syntax or super conciseness. I care about how easy would it be to modify, extend and use.

They mentioned we should look at the string lib in one of the videos.

I didn't use any string functions though except for strlen(). My solution isn't special, it's just IMO very modular. I wrote it from the perspective of "if I wanted to use a library that did caesar or vig encryption would I use mine?".

That means I had to abstract away how the algorithm worked and it had to be designed in a way that both algorithms shared some parts. There's very little logic in my main() function. It just mostly calls out to other functions with names that describe what's going on.

The 6.00x never got into this at all. My 6.00x version is shorter but it looks like someone vomited a bunch of Python in the main loop with no thought process on how hard/easy it would be to use as an end user. It's only shorter too because it's using functions that abstract away for loops. I chose not to use them in the C version for now.

Hey guys I'm also taking 6.00x and CS50x at the same time. I'm looking forward to discuss the courses with you all.

Taking both now too, as well as Computational Investing (at Coursera). Enjoying them all, especially the CI as I'm interested in the financial markets.

Finding this 'Caesar cipher' problem set testing this week though...

In the classes section for 6.00x one of the parts links to:
http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrica...g-and-classes/

I feel like I'm almost robbed here. The guy in that lecture explains things in such a nice way. Does anyone else think it's easier to follow what's going on with him vs the professors we have? Both the new guy for classes and the previous guy are both equally the same... they are basically robots dictating a book.

I almost want to go back and now and listen to every lecture for previous sections and then continue to listen to both side by side for new material.

King,
What problem are you having with caesar?

Really? I find that guy incredibly boring. In fact, when I was watching the old OCW videos, I lost interest almost exactly when he took over doing the lectures.

More the decryption section, its just taking me a long time . I find I can logically figure out a method of how to solve the problems fairly quickly, but takes me a while to then translate that into python code, and normally I make a slip up or two on the way and then fiddle around for ages trying to sort it... guess its part of the fun

How are you finding 6.00x difficulty wise? Only watched intro lecture for 5.50x so far, starting the catch up with it after this problem set done.

5.50x as in cs50x?

6.00x is so-so for me, you?. I struggle on some concepts and others aren't too bad. Logically figuring out the problem set is way more important than implementing it.

If you forgot how to properly setup a "for in" loop then all it takes is a quick Googling. You can't really Google on how to logically break down a problem step by step unless someone happened to have solved the exact problem you have.

I would say write out your pseudo code/logic until it's crystal clear, then worry about implementing it. Also make sure you know what Python is doing behind the scenes every step of the way. That is something I struggle with at times, especially with recursion and passing around more than just the result of calling itself.

Definitely watch every single video available for cs50x too if you're serious about learning. I find they explain concepts extremely well and some of the stuff they've taught fills in gaps for 6.00x or is explained from a different perspective.

Managed to plod my way through cs50x pset 2. So far I'm finding it much more difficult to code in C than in Python. Is that to be expected?

Nooo where did Prof Grisham go?

Actually, I sort of like this new guy...

Now I remember why I hate OOP.

I'm liking C because I'm finding a lot of value in having a language that requires you to declare the data type up front. I'd rather have a compiler tell me I'm wrong right away rather than have it runnable but then get unexpected results later on in the program.

It's like the compiler is doing extra debugging for you for free and a compiler is certainly going to be better at figuring out what's wrong with a program vs a human.

New guy is growing on me a little bit (watched the 2nd lecture). I still think the guy in the class room for OWC 2011 explained it better though.