> > And if they do understand it and know how to modify it then even if > > they did copy it they did the assignment and understood the code. > > Software reuse is not necessarily an evil to be stifled... > > > Have a look at the link I posted, Alan. Honestly, at that point > it's not "software reuse" anymore. It's straight lifting of code (and > removing of comments that would identify the original author). Worse, > lifting of *bad* code that happened to be the first hit returned by > Google, which tends to indicate that this particular student,
But that was my point. Lifting bad code and stripping comments suggests he/she didn't understand it. So the questioning should reveal that. And without going very deep into the depths I suspect. But if they did take the time to understand how every line worked after downloading it then it is indeed a passed assignment - finding code and reusing it is a plus. BUT stripping the authors name is is a no-no and should be pointed out - it may even be illegal and prosecutable. Alan G. _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
