<p>Answers few or none of the questions from <a rel="noopener" href="http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/">http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/</a> [Section Content]</p><p>Answers most of the questions from <a rel="noopener" href="http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/">http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/</a> [Section Content]</p><p>Good answers most of the questions from <a rel="noopener" href="http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/">http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/</a> [Section Content]</p><p>Good answers to most or all of the questions from <a rel="noopener" href="http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/">http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/teaching/cs2613/labs/journal/</a></p><p>At least one of the answers demonstrates careful thought or genuine insight.</p><p>Does not build and or / not pushed to git.</p><p>Builds, in a sane location, pushed to git.</p><p>Pushed to git, builds, has reasonable git commit messages, markdown or scribble formatting is not obviously broken.</p><p>Level 3, plus use of markdown / scribble to enhance the visual effects, or interesting/useful use of hyperlinks.</p><p>Incomplete test coverage, as indicated by DrRacket</p><p>Complete test coverage, as indicated by DrRacket</p><p>Complete coverage, plus at least one extra test per function.</p><p>Complete test coverage, at least one extra test per function, tests are designed and documented with respect to problem definition. Corner cases are considered.</p><p>Substantial problems with correctness or syntax errors.</p><p>Almost completely correct, perhaps one incorrect case / input.</p><p>Correct to the letter of the assignment.</p><p>Correct to the spirit of the assignment. Shows evidence of deeper understanding of the assignment, or defensive programming.</p><p>Bad indentation or cryptic identifiers,</p><p>Meaningful identifiers.&nbsp; Sensible racket indentation (according to DrRacket or Emacs).</p><p>Meaningful identifiers.&nbsp; Sensible racket indentation (according to DrRacket or Emacs). Good line width and line breaks.</p><p>Uses mutation or global variables.</p><p>No mutation or global variables.&nbsp; Follows assignment specified constructs and / or library functions.</p><p>No mutation or global variables.&nbsp; Follows assignment specified constructs and / or library functions. Code is concise, without being cryptic.</p><p>Incomplete test coverage, as indicated by "nyc jasmine"</p><p>Complete test coverage, as indicated by "nyc jasmine"</p><p>Complete coverage, plus at least one extra test per function.</p><p>Complete test coverage, at least one extra test per function, tests are designed and documented with respect to problem definition. Corner cases are considered.</p><p>Substantial problems with correctness or syntax errors.</p><p>Almost completely correct, perhaps one incorrect case / input.</p><p>Correct to the letter of the assignment.</p><p>Correct to the spirit of the assignment. Shows evidence of deeper understanding of the assignment, or defensive programming.</p><p>Bad indentation or cryptic identifiers, use of '==' without justification.</p><p>Meaningful identifiers. Sensible JavaScript indentation (according to code-oss or Emacs). Good line width and line breaks.</p><p>Meaningful identifiers. Sensible JavaScript indentation (according to code-oss or Emacs). Good line width and line breaks.</p><p>Use of global variables, other than <code>exports</code>.</p><p>Follows assignment specified constructs and / or library functions.</p><p>Follows assignment specified constructs and / or library functions. Code is concise, without being cryptic</p><p>Incomplete test coverage, as indicated by "pytest-3"</p><p>Complete test coverage, as indicated by "pytest-3"</p><p>Complete coverage, plus at least one extra test per function.</p><p>Complete test coverage, at least one extra test per function, tests are designed and documented with respect to problem definition. Corner cases are considered.</p><p>Substantial problems with correctness or syntax errors.</p><p>Almost completely correct, perhaps one incorrect case / input.</p><p>Correct to the letter of the assignment.</p><p>Correct to the spirit of the assignment. Shows evidence of deeper understanding of the assignment, or defensive programming.</p><p>Bad indentation or cryptic identifiers.</p><p>Meaningful identifiers.&nbsp; Docstrings for functions. Good line width and line breaks.</p><p>Meaningful identifiers. Docstrings for functions.&nbsp; Good line width and line breaks.</p><p>Use of global variables.</p><p>Follows assignment specified constructs and / or library functions.</p><p>Follows assignment specified constructs and / or library functions. Code is concise, without being cryptic</p><p>No extra tests, or few tests with minimal or no documentation.</p><p>Some extra tests, with documentation.</p><p>&nbsp;At least one extra test per function, with documentation.</p><p>&nbsp;At least one extra test per function, tests are designed and documented with respect to problem definition. Corner cases are considered.</p><p>Substantial problems with correctness or syntax errors.</p><p>Almost completely correct, perhaps one incorrect case / input.</p><p>Correct to the letter of the assignment.</p><p>Correct to the spirit of the assignment. Shows evidence of deeper understanding of the assignment, or defensive programming.</p><p>Bad indentation or cryptic identifiers, or minimal comments.</p><p>Meaningful identifiers.&nbsp; Usage blocks for functions. Some Comments.</p><p>Meaningful identifiers. Usage blocks for functions.&nbsp; Useful comments.</p><p>More than one loop in total.</p><p>Mostly vectorized,&nbsp; at most one loop.</p><p>Completely vectorized. </p>