Overview

For this stage, you will test your airport weather program on a larger dataset, and tighten your testing and testing plan based on the initial discussion in class.

Continue working in the same repo and same journal file.

The Datasets

Kathi will release (to your repos) a new folder named data-3-month. It has files with the same filenames as the 5-day version, but many more rows than before.

Assignment Tasks

Task 1: Make a commit in your repo with the message "version 1 done", so we can easily find where your work was before you start this stage. In order to do this, some file will need to appear to have changed (so github thinks it has something to commit). There are two ways to do this:

1. Go to a terminal/power shell window and run the command touch <filename> for some filename in your repo (you don't include the angle brackets -- that's common notation for when you need to replace a part of a command with something specific to your setup). ''Touching'' a file is a way to make it look like a file has been changed, but without modifying the actual contents.
2. Open a file in your editor and add a space somewhere (like at the end of a comment). This works, but github will actually report this as an edit, which is less clean in professional practice.

Task 2: Pull in the new data files. Once Kathi releases the assignment, you will get what's called a ''pull request'' from github to bring the new data directory into your repo. It will be called (something like) “GitHub Classroom: Sync Assignment”. Follow the instructions that github gives you to review and merge the pull requests into your repo. You should see the new files after that.

Task 3: Run your program using the new files. Address any issues and revise your testing plan and tests accordingly. You are aiming for the standard of enabling someone else to trust that your program is reliable.

Grading

We're far enough along to start assessing your work. For this assignment, you'll get feedback on your work relative to a specific rubric about testing plans and tests.

To make this most instructive for everyone, we're going to do this through peer review. We will give you a concrete rubric (on Tuesday, after the assignment comes in) and ask you to review two classmates' submissions against that rubric (you'll be assigned classmates to review at random). We're using peer review here because learning comes from seeing multiple approaches to a problem and attending to their features. You'll simply get more out of the feedback process by providing as well as receiving it. And this lets you start to practice the critical skill of reviewing others' work.

We'll give an indication of how your peer scoring would have mapped to formal grades. These grades won't ''count'' in your final grade computation. Instead, think of this as a practice run with the rubric for testing to prepare you for later assignments when the grades will count.

Submission Instructions

Push your code regularly to the repo as you go. By the deadline, add your Claude transcripts, code, and any .md files (e.g., TESTING.md) and push to the repo. Do a final commit with the message ''version 2 done''. Submit the URL to your journal.