I aml preparing to the essay exams and get a small problem with providing adv and disadv for some choices.
For example in my choices.txt:
What you use RMI or sockets:
I used RMI because it is simply to understand.
And thats all. Why not? Its enough to answer the same questions on the essay exam with the same manner? Just because its simply?
For the question about RMI you can just answer that one, but other questions will ask you about how you implemented some requirements. I think just answering "it is easy to understand" won't be enough (I don't know if it will end up in a failure). I provided 5-6 advantages and 2-3 disadvantages to illustrate why RMI was the obvious choice for the networking protocol (both in my choices.txt and as the essay exam).
As far as I can remember, in this kind of question, you'll also be asked about the advantages and disadvantages of your choice. So just saying that it is easier won't be enough. The other questions, you'll have to explain how your approach works.
Also, remember to give implementation details in your answers, because the idea of this exam is to show them that you are the person that coded everything, so it's very important that your answers match what's been implemented.
i 'm looking straight forward to do the essay exam in the next few weeks... So, one more quesion:
Roberto says, that we have to give implementation details in our answers. What does that mean? Should we give pseudo code? Or do we really have to dive into some concrete code to analyze? Or are explanations about their function enough?
Roberto means that you will look good if you give in your answers class names, variables, data members, method names,... So you really prove you have developed the code yourself and if you have coded the assignment yourself, it certainly will not be very difficult. You have spent weeks/months with your code, that you'll recollect all these specific names without any problem. Although that was my experience