The paper discusses a course in software development, as advocated by the CC2001 report. The course revolves around a single project divided into six assignments. In addition, the course includes lab assignments covering the tool of the week. The order of coverage of topics and the order of labs is determined using just-in-time learning. Grading criteria and an assessment of the course are discussed.

No abstract available.

The phases of a grading system are discussed, namely: delivery, assessment, marking, review, and return. A system which addresses the back end, namely, the last three phases, is described. Late binding of marks to a graded project is used, simplifying the revision process. The use of the system by various courses and its benefits are discussed.

No abstract available.

In this paper we explore frameworks for performing unit testing in Java. The vehicle for this exploration is a student-written, skeleton program developed for the Computer Graphics course. Our analysis of this one experiment leads us to speculate what benefits in program development and design might accrue by requiring students to unit test their own programs.

In our approach to the Programming Languages course, formal models are integrated as a thread that pervades the course, rather than as a one of many topics that is introduced and then dropped. In this paper we present a simplified version of the formal semantics used. We then show how this model is implemented using the object-oriented, functional and logic paradigms.

In this paper we explore Wirth's[ll] backtracking algorithm from the perspective of algorithm reuse and sep- aration of concerns.We explore treatment of this problem in object-oriented data structures and algorithms texts.Finally, we present a reusable backtracking (or depth-first search) class.

No abstract available.

Formulas for estimating the probability of failure when testing reveals no errors are introduced. These formulas incorporate random testing results, information about the input distribution; and prior assumptions about the probability of failure of the software. The formulas are not restricted to equally likely input distributions, and the probability of failure estimate can be adjusted when assumptions about the input distribution change. The formulas are based on a discrete sample space statistical model of software and include Bayesian prior assumptions. Reusable software and software in life-critical applications are particularly appropriate candidates for this type of analysis.>

In this paper we discuss our experiences using a translator writing system in the compiler construction course. We have found that such a system provides a great deal of flexibility to the instructor. Students can easily construct a complete compiler including code generation for a small language. We believe our tools and experiences are transferable to other translator writing systems.

Abstract The Mystro Assembler Construction System (MACS) is a tool kit for assembler writers, based upon a parser‐generator for ambiguous attribute grammars, automatic text manipulation, and a skeletal assembler. Attention has been paid in MACS to aiding the assembler writer in employing the software methodology of iterative enhancement and in avoiding the more tedious aspects of assembler construction.

This paper discusses axiomatic and functional models of the semantics of structured programming. The models are presented together with their respective methodologies for proving program correctness and for deriving correct programs. Examples using these methodologies are given. Finally, the models are compared and contrasted.

In recent years a number of colleges and universities have modified their introductory computer science curriculum. These schools have concluded that algorithm development and computer programming are sufficiently difficult to require a two semester sequence. This change even appears in the working report of the ACM Committee on Curriculum in Computer Sciences [1].

In the author's view structured programming consists of the use of the following: structure, abstraction, and specification. The purpose of this paper is to develop formal specifications for a nontrivial program in order to facilitate a proof of correctness. It is shown how the specifications serve as an abstraction for the program. A proof of correctness then consists of merely showing that the program at each level meets its formal specifications. Under this methodology lower levels of the program can be changed without affecting higher levels.