Differences between (R)Unified Process And Extreme Programming - extreme-programming

I've searched for at question like this and i dont think there are one.
As the title says... I know there are huge differences between how to do things in (R)UP and in XP as a way of developing systems, but what are the really?
I'm trying to write a nice explanation that i can give to other people so they hopefully easy can understand the differences.
I want to compare the following subjects:
Design
Documentation
Prototyping
User involvement
Usability
Technical quality
Test
I'm not trying to start a discussion, just want to know if you know any good sites that could have the information i'm looking for or if you have a answer for one of the subjects. I have allready written some of it myself but due to the fact that i dont want it to be a subjective comparison, i then ask you.

You might find this useful
XP vs RUP (pdf)

RUP and XP are not mutually exclusive. Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges -- you can enjoy both. Many companies following RUP choose to include some or all of XP practices.
For the basics, the wikipedia articles are a good start:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Rational_Unified_Process
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_programming_practices

Related

I'm interested in Programming Languages. What areas of programming are good for me?

I've always been interested in writing and designing programming languages. Of course, it's pretty difficult to find an employer that will let you write a programming language as part of your job. So I'm looking for the "next best thing".
What fields of programming will let me get some experience solving some related problems? Or what kinds of employers are most likely to view all of my dinky little interpreters as relevant experience?
If your interest in language design is irrepressible, get a Ph.D. and make it your area of research. You can count on academia to support all manner of unprofitable activity.
None. The bulk of the professionals in that field do not design languages for a living, but retarget existing compilers to new (usually embedded) targets, or work on source2source conversion systems for legacy code, making a few language extensions in the process.
You should really ask yourself if you want this, because, besides from an extremely lucky shot, that is the realistic outlook of what you will do if you go into this industry.
Remember that the big public toolchain industry is not very profitable at the moment, and that maybe a good 100 languages are in largescale pulbic use and continually maintained, after 30 years of programming languages creation.
I know this is is very gloom, but I hope it sets you on the path to chuck the romantic, hobbyist view, and start researching how the real world in this field looks like.
Moreover, having done small hobby projects on your own is not really a pre. You need to show that you can work on large projects in a team, more than that you can create a small interpreter on your own. If you really want to pursue this, I'd recommend:
stay in school, and get a bachelor (preferably a master or PHD) in CS.
join some opensource team that works on a significant project in the field. gcc, but also the Java world, Tracemonkey (Mozilla), Mono etc. Verifiable experience in real world scenarios is very important.
I think the best way to get into this type of work would be to undertake an advanced degree with a specific focus on language design, compilers etc. It's going to be very tough for you to walk in off the street into a private company and start writing new language features otherwise.
You could also shoot a little higher and on your own, or with a small team, produce something that is much more than just a dinky little interpreter. Show your potential employer that you can produce something useful.
I have worked as an embedded programmer for the past ten years. Before that I wrote compilers (and assemblers, linkers, debuggers, etc.) for 20 years.
My co-workers joke that I turn every problem in to a parsing problem. And they're right. I've used techniques that are appropriate for language design many times during the course of my career.
Today, I play around with compiler stuff on the side: http://ellcc.org. It helps me scratch my language itch.
Actually, there is a fair bit of work going on with visual programming. It isn't exactly traditional programming language work as we know it but there is a need for it. For example, a lot of advanced data analysis tools rely on visual programming tools (Pentaho). You don't have to look too hard to find good practical uses of visual programming.
To get into visual programming languages, you will need to do an advanced degree with an advisor in the area. You will need to do some human computer interaction / interface work in addition to the programming language stuff.
An employer that has a rich "domain" (i.e. a complex industry) can benefit from a "domain specific language".
Will they realise this? Unlikely. They'll be too likely trapped in their deep domain (and entrenched legacy systems) to see that a targeted language could help unclog the mire.
But if you bury yourself in a complex industry for long enough to gain rich domain knowledge you may then be able to turn them with your own skunkwork DSL. Slim chance.
Stay in academia. If you want to develop a new language your chances of being paid to do so are vanishingly small. Newer languages tend to be expressions of a novel problem domain, and you only really encounter the chance to develop them where (a) novel problems are part of the scenery, and (b) no-one is troubled by the necessity to actually earn a living.
Please take your time over it, as well. Speaking as a jobbing developer, the last thing I need is another blasted language to learn :-)
In static analysis there is a lot to do, and the problems that come up are related to those that interest you.
Most currently popular languages came out of a geniune NEED to scratch a particular ITCH. Python came about because some non-C programmers NEEDed to customize inputs their C programs and libraries. Lua came out of the NEED to embed a scripting language in to C programs. Erlang was created to address the NEED of 99.9999999% uptime, hot code loading, and highly concurrent execution. Perl came out of the NEED to easily write programs that parsed text files.
So the very simple question any employer will be asking themselves, and you should ask yourself is. What NEED can I supply a solution to that doesn't exist. Hobby work very seldom shows that you are providing solutions to a NEED, most of the time it is showing that you like to re-invent the wheel for the sake of re-inventing the wheel.

What are the essential concepts all programmers should learn and use? [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I'm currently learning to program, and I didn't take CS classes so I'm basically starting out on the bottom. I have been putting together code on and off for many years, but haven't really had a good understanding of essential concepts needed for enganging in bigger projects. Object-orientation is an obvious one, and I feel I'm beginning to understand some of the concepts there. Then there is a lot of buzz and methodology, such as MVC, UML, SCRUM, SOLID and so foth and so on.. I've looked at many of these but I'm always stumped as most explanations seem to require some understanding of other concepts.
I want to learn this stuff the "right" way, so where do I begin?
What are the overarching constructs I need to understand that enable me to understand all the underpinnings of software architecture/design/development?
What am I missing?
Are there constructs and concepts that can and should wait until I've cleared the foundation?
The SOLID principles are probably the most important.
From those you understand the motivation behind using a pattern such as MVC, why people think of persistence ignorance as important and so on. They are at the core of the majority of good practices.
Loose coupling, high cohesion.
And as for books, Code Complete covers almost everything at some level, at least.
Software development is a HUGE arena and you should be careful that you don't take on too much too quickly. Unless you're going to go in the direction of functional programming I'd suggest you start off by making sure you fully understand the concepts surrounding OO design and programming as this should be your foundation.
Once you understand that well you'll be able to understand design patterns a lot better and get a feeling for when to use them.
I'd suggest you try out a few languages till you find one you feel comfortable with, personally my favourite language is Ada which is a very pure OO language but in the business world I work in C# which still has a lot of issues but these are outweighed by the more vibrant job market.
I wouldn't worry too much about Scrum at this stage as you need to focus more on your dev skills before worrying about project management.
The most important thing is to work with as much code as possible, download lots of good reference solutions and work through the code till you understand it, and try and keep an eye on the development trends.
If its viable you may also want to considering attending some developer conferences too as these can be very inspirational.
Stay away from ACRONYMS (including those you've listed) and Methodologies(tm). At least in the beginning.
Read good books. Start with this one: Pragmatic Programmer. Learn algorithms and data structures, possibly from Introduction to algorithms by Cormen et al.
Write a lot of code. Practice is more important than anything else.
How to test software with unit tests. Being able to do that will solve 90% of all the other issue automatically since you can't test while they are around.
When you know how to test, you can start on advanced topics like design.
I'd recommend "Object Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications" by Grady Booch et al. The latest editoin has detailed explanation of concepts of OOAD including MVC, UML (which he invented), and discussions on how to manage the whole process of software development. The second part of the book exemplifies all this by developing 5 sample systems (with sometimes orthogonal aspects from the very core).
Another good one is of course Design Patterns by GoF which will give you an idea of loose coupling, ways to efficient encapsulation and reuse of code, etc
For what concerns the algorithmic part, take any book which is not bounded to a particular programming language. My favorite is Introduction to Algorithms by T. H. Cormen et al, it gets a bit theoretical at some points, but I especially like it when they are proving certain things and not just asking you to believe it.
When you are working with any modern general purpose language, it is probably a good idea to get a handle on patterns (MVC or Model-View-Controller is one). The book by the "gang of four" is a must read for this, or at least research a few and use it as a reference.
clicky
Refactoring is another concept that should be in your arsenal. The book by Martin Fowler on this subject is a very nice read and helps understand the aforementioned patterns better also a little explanation about UML is included.
Can't post more than one hyperlink so...
search on amazon for: Refactoring, Improving the design of existing code
When you want to communicate your designs UML (Unified Modelling Language) is the 'tool' of choice for many people. However UML is large and unwieldy but Martin Fowler (again) has managed to boil it down to the essentials.
search on amazon for: UML Distilled (make sure you get the most recent one)
SCRUM is one of many methods that is used to manage software development groups, I do not think there is much merit in learning that when you are just starting out or on your own. Especially not in detail.
Hope it helps...
PS: SOLID I haven't heard about yet, somebody else has to help you there.
You'd have a decent foundation if you surveyed basic Data Structures, Algorithms, and Algorithms Analysis.
I think that you should start coding real world problems to get a feel for problems in the programming domain.
Then you have a better background to understand why objects are important. Then, after managing objects, you will learn why patterns and OO principles are important.
Personally, I highly recommend the Agile Software Development, by Robert C Martin.
But it may be a long and tiresome read unless you have a feel for the problems being solved. I'm afraid that you may need 500-1000 hours of coding at the minimum before you get an appreciation that the problems being solved are real.
And it probably takes 7000+ hours before you develop an instinctive heart-felt pain from merely reading the problems, making this sort of book become the page-turner that it should be.
Regrettably, many of the sound practices that you should develop are only appreciated after having to live with your code over time. If you just do many excercises and abandon the code afterwards just "because it works", then you are missing out on the greatest pain of all. It is a luxury our industry does not have, and "technical debt" is a very very real and costly to those with large code bases.
I feel kinda silly answering my own question like this.. :) But one valuable resource I've found for learning to write code, is the Euler Project at http://www.projecteuler.net
It's basically a collection of mathmatical problems that you solve by writing your own solution to it. Once you've found the answer to a particular problem, you're allowed access to that problem's forum where different solutions are discussed. I was amazed at how much I was learning in a) solving a challenge, b) reading about other peoples approaches and c) how many programming languages there are out there! :)
The problems start out easy (you can tell by the number of people who's solved them) and progress to harder and harder problems.
Currently I'm working on problem #3, having solved the previous two... I recommend you start chippin' away at them, no matter your level!

Compilers and beyond

I want to go backwards and learn more about how compilers, processors and memory operate on my programs. I am also interested in the physics on which all of this depends. Any good references or books would be appreciated...
For compilers, the ultimate book is the Dragon Book, aka Principles of Compiler Design. It is a bit heavy going at first, but it becomes easier with each pass you make at it. It's a classic and should be read by all serious students of programming/computer science.
My first suggestion was going to be Code which has been suggested already. A better, but harder, book on the subject of processors is Computer Organization & Design by Hennessey & Patterson. You might look for an older edition on Amazon or Half.com. They'll be a lot cheaper and have basically the same information.
These will both teach you the basics of how a processor works, assembly language, etc. This will help you understand how your program will be interpreted and thus, what sort of performance bottlenecks might exist based on your design.
It sounds to me like you want to get a Computer Science degree. :-)
The simplest introduction , and very well written is Code by Charles Petzold
alt text http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31t68r9K28L._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA240_SH20_OU01_.jpg
I don't normally think of physics and compilers at the same time.
This link might get you thinking.
Write a simple emulator for something like C64. By thinking of how to emulate the CPU, Memory and other Chips you will learn how these simple machines worked. Today's computers pretty much operate in the same manner with a lot more complexity but the basic idea is the same.
Your emulator doesnt have to be super fast - try and get the C64 welcome message up and if you did your code right - you should be able to POKE and write basic programs and have them work :)
10 PRINT "DONT LISTEN TO ME - APPLE //E's RULE"
20 GOTO 10
I would suggest learning enough assembler to be able to write a simple Hello World program in assembler.
This will teach you exactly how the CPU works at the register and memory level.
It will also give you a good introduction into how source code is converted to object files and how the linker brings together all these object files together to create a working program.
Pick up any of the Hennessy & Patterson books.
Computer Architecture - A Quantitative Approach or Computer Organization & Design - The Hardware Interface
Feynman has a nice bit on the Physics of Computation:
which addresses the second part of your question.
Pick up a book on "Computer Organization" or "Computer Architecture" on Amazon. This is what we used when I was in college. It's not too thick, and will give you the basics, from the gate level all of the way up to how memory is organized and programs are written. If, after this, you want to look deeper into the physics, then you'll want to pick up a book on semiconductor physics. (But if I were you I'd just start by looking up "logic gate", "diode", and "transistor" on wikipedia!)
If you really want to get into the physics of processors/ IC's, you need to have a solid electromagnetics/circuit analysis background. It's certainly not easy stuff, and won't really make you a better programmer. If you're really interested, borrow some books from an EE friend!
An abstraction up from that is the gate level, which programmers can usually grok since it's all about logic.
I made a similar resolution after reading Steve Yegge's recommendation to learn about compilers. I've been really enjoying Nisan and Schocken's The Elements of Computing Systems: Building a Modern Computer from First Principles which is first a textbook, second, a one-semester course for freshmen or seniors, and third, a website providing the lectures and cross-platform emulation-simulation software: http://www1.idc.ac.il/tecs/ (TECS)
The topics go from NAND (programming digital logic circuits in HDL), up through flip-flops, ALUs and registers, assemblers, parsing and compilers, operating systems, and GUIs. You, the student, implements every one of these topics on the hardware simulator or software emulator provided on the website. To me, it is a celebration of human ingenuity that this range of ideas can be so deeply covered in 3--4 months by undergrads. One of the authors/professors gave a Google Tech Talk on the subject that's worth checking out if you have an hour to spare away from their course.
I can't recommend an equally-compelling resource for the physics of computation, but I can perfunctorily say that my electrical engineering department's first two core EE courses students could take (simultaneously if they chose) were Circuits 1 and Semiconductors 1. The former dealt with voltage, current, inductors, capacitors, op amps, etc.---while the latter dealt with quantum mechanics, crystals, doping, charge carriers, etc., and most directly spoke to the physics of digital processing and storage devices. It's difficult for me to imagine a hands-on simulation environment like TECS for such a topic, though, making it more appropriate for academic than hobbyist/professional study?

Did you feel learning to program with turtle graphics was useful? [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
I'm preparing to teach someone to program. When I learned the course material, I used turtle graphics for the first few exercises. In reading introductory textbooks, I have not found one that uses the technique. Did others find this approach helpful? If not, what is a better way to learn to program?
I think it depends on age of the target group.
If they are children (I would say up to 12-14 years), doing any easy graphics is a good way to motivate them; on the other hand, don't expect them to learn much about real programming or algorithms.
If they are teens (14-18), it's perhaps still good to use some algorithms that give pretty results (for example 3D or fractals), but since they are older and capable of more abstract thinking, I don't think 2D turtle graphics is interesting enough.
If they are older, doing any graphics is a distraction. At that age, they should have enough inner motivation to learn without anything fancy.
To sum up, I think that fancy graphics serves more motivational role (that you see what you did fast, and it's easy to show others what can you do with a computer) than learning role (that it would make learning real programming easier).
In the late 80s, before I was programming in C, I was programming in Applesoft BASIC and Logo. As a child I thought the turtle was great because it make programming simple. If I decide to teach my children Logo I will probably start here to get an actively developed Logo interpreter.
The key thing about LOGO is user-defined functions. It is very good at conveying that, as long as you emphasize it. Show interactively how to draw a square, then make a new word called square. Then show how you can draw patterns using square. Then make those patterns into words, and so on.
You could do worse in teaching programming than using a tool like Scratch. It's a drag and drop programming interface and can be used to teach basic concepts of programming with some fun visual results (as can be seen from the gallery on their website).
Rob
Logo gave me a very clear picture (no pun intended) on how recursive functions would work, and since I was doing assembly programming at the time, the need to return to the previous state when returning to a method became very clear with Logo.
Recursive implementations of things where also very easy to see the effect of.
I wrote script/code in a c-like dialect for a game called Doom2 before I knew what programming was, so when it came to seriously learning about concepts such as pointers, inheritance and polymorphism I found the basics a breeze because I could construct a mental model to not only help me understand, but also appreciate how cool things like pointers and arrays are.
A friend of mine is a good programming student, but he gets frustrated when he can't visualize an algorithm working, when I was starting to help other students I found they had the same problem, if they can't see something working it's harder to appreciate as a fledgling programmer, the same friend eloquently suggested I "Show 'em some crazy pimp shit and then show them how it's done". He's right, even if someone really wants to learn something they'll be able to draw on more mental energy if they think what they're learning lets them do awesome things.
My best bit of advice is this: AT THE START SPEND AS LITTLE TIME PROGRAMMING TO THE CONSOLE AS POSSIBLE
It makes you feel constrained and your efforts appear futile, only after you appreciate it as a front end should it be used for learning to program. I wouldn't use logo myself because I don't think it can teach concepts such as the aforementioned polymorphism or inheritance nearly as well as other methods, I know a friend of mine is teaching a teenager how to program using XNA in a wrapper, I think anything that can let you blit an image to the screen is fine. That way you can see why you'd want an abstract base class called EnemyEntity with behavior that's inherited by zombie and dog etc. It's not that the concepts are hard to understand, it's just that at first they're hard to appreciate.
I could go on but I think that puts across what I've learned by teaching others. I think using graphics in teaching programming allows students to gain the ability to build mental models of intangible concepts faster than any other.
XNA If you want to teach C# that's an amazing graphics library, just write a wrapper sprite class to hide as much complexity when first starting out and teaching concepts.
SDL A lower level library if you're going to start with c++
During one of my first-year computer science papers we used Java to create fractal patterns via a turtle object.
It was pretty fun to see visually whether or not we had correctly implemented the algorithm required to produce a certain pattern. However, so answer the main question, I wouldn't say that programming via a turtle is useful. I'd say the best way to teach someone to program is to get them to build their own app to do whatever they want it to do. This gives them creative control, plus if they get stuck they can learn how to resolve a problem.
I strongly suggest to start with a interpreted language like Logo (not compiled) because of the quality of the error messages. Reading error messages is very important in this process. Also, at the easy level, Logo allows you to run your instructions one by one in direct mode and carry them to your procedures when you get the expected results.
# Alex: MicroWorlds is a commercial version of Logo and it does exist in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, Russian, etc. it's a big plus if you are not a native English-speaking person.
LOGO is not only Turtle-Graphics.
There are also other interesting concepts in it which come from LISP.
'Turtle' is just icing on the cake and the "imperative" side of Logo.
:)
I learned to program in BASIC by writing simple programs drawing faces (I mean circles and squares) on the screen. Somehow the whole turtle programming was never my thing, although a few of my friends learned that way. Later on I moved to Pascal, then to Delphi, Java and C++/C#.
In my opinion the trick is to "wow" your student and impress/empower with potential things that you can accomplish by writing your own programs. I would actually demonstrate some GUI programming or game programming. It's much easier to learn the basics by keeping the end goal in mind.
Recently I came across SmallBasic - a cool programming environment for kids designed to teach concepts. I would give that a try. It comes with a pretty complete paper describing how to use it.
When I got my first computer (VIC-20) and started programming it was very hard to explain to my parents what I was doing.
My mother tok a course in computing preparing for a project of computerizing the library she worked in. They had a couple of classes introducing them to programming. After learning LOGO she came home and said that she suddenly understood what I was into.
So LOGO with turtle graphics brought us closer together!
I did a "computing for kids" course in the late eighties, and there was an extensive section on turtle graphics using logo. In all honesty I was bored to tears, and learned virtually nothing from it.
I think "programming the turtle" might work better for someone who is artistically inclined, or hugely into geometry, but by and large, there are far more interesting problems to attack, even for kids.
Ah, the memories of good old Logo. I think I got more of a geometry lesson than a programming lesson out of it, e.g. figuring out how much to turn at various points to produce a particular shape, design or pattern. It may work if you plan on mixing geometry with the programming, but if the person doesn't have the basics of geometry, e.g. what is a square and how is it different from other 4-sided shapes, what is a triangle, etc.
I used logo and turtle at school too, a great introduction.
It looks like our kids will be getting a slightly updated interface with Microsoft Kodu. It looks very impressive. It's an icon based programming language made for creating games that runs on X-Box Live.
I'm currently learning python and using a little bit of turtle. In labs we haven't used it, but our homework does. It's nice to know it exists, and it's a good way to get certain commands and syntax in. Overall I don't feel it was completely necessary though.
When I was young, I found it very interesting. It was one of the first programming languages that I've learned, even though I've used it for about two days. It started my interest in programming.
Nowadays, I think the syntax is a bit unclear because most statements are abbreviations. Nowadays, computers are far more powerful thus the language could profit from clearer statement. Another factor is the native language of the person who is learning to use it. If English is not your native language then Logo becomes a bit more complex to understand. So if you're teaching Logo to children, make sure they're familiar with English terms first. (Quite easy if you're a native English-speaking person. More complex if you're originally Dutch, German, French, Portuguese. Even more complex if you're Russian or Chinese because you'd have to adjust to a different character set too.)
I have just begun teaching my 7-year-old how to program using Logo, and he is having a load of fun with it. The commands are easy enough for his limited reading ability and he just loves drawing cool pictures using the turtle graphics. I was amazed at how well he retained what he had learned using it, so I feel it was a good choice for his age.
For older kids (or adults) other languages might have more advantages as a beginner language though
Personal experience, YMMV...
My first encounter with a computer was turtle graphics in my early teens. I loved and was immediately hooked. (Perhaps because for the first time someone [something] did exactly what I told it to do?)
The visual and instant feedback made me want to do more and more. I really wanted to figure out how to replicate the pictures I saw in the book I was using. Without me even classifying it as "work", it slowly built up my early programming skills and my confidence I could learn on my own.
I credit it with sending me in the path I'm in today, a happy software developer who can't believe I get paid to do this work (I know, I know - all corporate snickering aside, I like my work).
As I said, YMMV.

Recommendations needed for good AI references [closed]

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
I've been asked to help out on an XNA project with the AI. I'm not totally new to the concepts (pathfinding, flocking, etc.) but this would be the first "real" code. I'd be very thankful for any resources (links or books); I want to make sure I do this right.
The standard textbook and a great place to start is Russel and Norvig's Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. You can also get MIT's Intro AI course via OpenCourseWare
These links might be useful to check out, for a beginning (even if most are mostly game-oriented):
http://www.a-i.com
http://www.kynogon.com
http://openai.sourceforge.net
http://www.botspot.com
http://aigamedev.com
http://www.aiwisdom.com
http://igda.org/ai/
http://gamedev.net
and http://www.gameai.com, who has already been mentioned..
I was surprised not to find in the above answers any of the books I though of so here goes, the books that any development team in a game studio will always have:
Game Programming Gems (there are 7
books by now).
AI programming Wisdom (I think 4 are out).
Both series are combined of many very useful articles and browsing through the first two of each series (the game programming gems have AI chapters which includes several very good articles) will give you nice understanding of both basic and advanced techniques used currently in the game industry.
BTW - you can also gain understanding in other areas like data structures, effects, 3D and sound.
Enjoy the reading,
I have to comment that AI: A modern approach is a pretty dry read.
If you're actually interested in AI, and want to stay interested, you are much better off going with Norvig's gift to the world: Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming. Not only is this a great intro to AI, it's a great intro to beautiful programming.
I second "Artificial Intelligence: A modern Approach". It is really good at explaining the items in a basic, understandable manner. It's also a book that is used in many universities to teach students the basics of artificial intelligence.
Maybe it is not such a bad idea to take also take a look at the slides they use in the courses, to get a basic idea on the topics at hand.
There's an XNA specific tutorial on flocking.
You might find the blog, wiki and forums on AiGameDev.com useful.
Russel and Norvig's Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach.
Be warned, this book is a bit of a door step. Very detailed and generally very good. I would probably recommend some of the online sites first to get a flavour for the types of algorithms you might need and then selectivly dive into Russel and Norvig to get a more in depth view of the implementation.
Dont forget the usefulness of online forurms such as this or aigamedev.com as I used these extensivly throughout my own AI degree. You might also find that you need to buy a specific game AI book to help with some game logic as this can be substantially different from AI 'application' logic. In game scenarios I think you're generally lucky if you get ~5-10% of the processing time whereas in an application the AI is generally the only thing running and this allows for much more advanced and processor heavy techniques. This is also something that you might need to consider and Im not entirely sure that Russel & Norvig is the best place.
Good luck with the project, I wish I was in your shoes!
Two references of interest should be
Artificial Intelligence for games (Ian Millington)
Programming Game AI by example (Matt Buckland)
I second the reference to the AI forum at gamedev.net. particularly because some of the key posters on that forum work in the industry (including the writer of AiGameDev.com), or use AI & related techniques like planning and optimisation in practical domains.
Amit's A* Pages are extremely helpful in writing pathfinding code. Lots of meaty theoretical and practical info there.
I've always found Steve Woodcock's Game AI site to be a great reference. It includes discussion, source code, and pointers to books, conferences, etc.
I would second: Programming Game AI by example (Matt Buckland)
This book gives great algorithms that should easly port to XNA.
I just read some excerpts from AI a modern approach, mostly because I'm interested in the matter, not because I could actually use it. AI a modern approach is quite good, it's well written and really interesting, however I don't know if you can use it, maybe not if you are more looking for code samples..

Resources