Grading Guidelines for the Final Project (s99)
=============================================

The solutions can exploit a whole range of programming techniques

   - find-route style: generative recursion with backtracking 
     watch out for uses of uselsss set!'s and vector-set!'s 

   - find-route with imperative backtracking: you understand the
     trial-and-error step as an imperative manipulation of the board 
     and you properly undo these steps if the attempt fails 
     -- no undo, bad credit

   - find-route with accumulator: the accumulator tells you how many moves
     you have made and then you can check whether it's the last one by 
     comparing it with |PEGS|-2
     -- they must use reverse at the end, otherwise -5%
     
   - missionary-and-cannibal style breadth-first search 

   - find-route with set!'ed accumulator: very difficult -- needs undo
     action 

Ergo, I will only give you three hard rules to follow. The rules simply
reinforce the most basic design elements we have trained this semester and
that I emphasized again and again: 

1. No signed design review, no credit. No exceptions. 

2. The final project must contain: (quote and annotation)

	       1. a contract for each definition

   This means of course that every class of data used in a contract is
   specified:
    - 10% for systematic omission of contract 
    - 10% for systematic omission of data definitions 
	  or systematically flawed data definition
    - 10% for systematic omission of purpose and effect statements. 

       While this is not explicitly required, it is a standard part of the
       recipe.

    - deduct less for an occasional lapse


	       2. a block comment with tests 

   This means at least one test per function 
    - 10% for systematic omission 
    - 10% for flawed tests, i.e., tests that don't cover at least 
      all clauses of a datatype definition 
    - deduct less for an occasional lapse

	       3. (optional) any other intermediate material you used to
	       develop the individual procedures

   I expect a short explanation of what kind of approach they used: 
    "... like missionary and cannibals" 
    "... like find-route" 
    "... a function that backtracks" 
   Deduct up to 
    - 5% for omission of such "global comment" 

3. All functions should follow proper shape: 
   - domain knowledge
   - structural recursion 
   - generative recursion (at least one of them)

   Functions that don't follow the proper shape and contain errors
   are punished with 10% -- people must make conscientious choices
   when they program -- lesser mistakes, lesser problems. 

Do not subtract more than 100%. Do not waste time with obviously correct or
obviously flawed solutions; give them a grade that matches the quality of 
their design.