Jon,
It's fantastic to see people engaged already but I think it best we
keep hold of our thoughts until Dojo - that way all participants start
the Dojo without having to read email exchanges here and elsewhere.
As the comments in the code suggest, everything is open to change and
we've only provided a minimal starting point (rather than a scary
"blank sheet"). Of course there are *lots* of ways to represent a tic-
tac-toe board. We just plumped for one but *you* could change it if
you wanted to... of course that means you'll have to be first into the
hot seat... ;-)
We discussed different playing capabilities at some length at the last
planning meetup... in the end we thought it better to let the code
grow in the Dojo rather than provide another scaffold. Less is more
and all that...
If there is time there's no reason why we can't attempt your different
player combination suggestions.
Best wishes,
Nicholas.
On 28 Sep 2009, at 12:28, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 10:29:33PM +0100, Paul Nasrat wrote:
I've looked through the skeletal code on github and that looks like a
good start.
The lines in the test code which look like this:
assert state == [ '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', '_', ]
are somewhat making the assumption that the board state object will
not be immutable.
Also I'd like to put in a strong vote for part of the spec being that
the game will allow human v human, human v computer, or computer v
computer games (by entering "number of players: zero" ;-) )
_______________________________________________
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
_______________________________________________
python-uk mailing list
python-uk@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-uk
