First, the positives. I appreciate that Reinman knows his field well, and when he's talking about hardwarey things it's evident that he has the capability to be a terrific lecturer . At least in the start of the quarter, the in-person lectures were genuinely engaging and I found myself wanting to go to every class. The labs were never absurdly difficult, the workload was entirely reasonable, and everyone from Reinman to the TAs was willing to be helpful.

That being said, the structure of the class was a disaster waiting to happen. The negatives:

a) We had to watch roughly 1.5 hours of pre-lectures BEFORE the in-person lectures. These in-person lectures were marketed as Prof. Reinman reviewing additional examples to solidify our understanding of a concept, but that didn't end up being the case. For the first 3 weeks or so, the in-person lectures were at least 70% Q&A, with students asking Reinman the same questions over and over (to the point where he wore a shirt with one frequently-asked-question printed on it). To Reinman's credit, he did go over useful examples when he wasn't consistently being bombarded with the same questions; but regardless, this did mean that I would spend roughly 6-7 hours a week on CS 33 lectures alone and at least 2 of those hours would be useless - which is simply unfeasible. Keep in mind that Nowatzki, the fall CS 33 professor, gets through roughly the same content in about half the lecture time - so it's definitely not impossible.

b) The in-class lecture examples were often all over the place. Sometimes he'd bring up a concept, then go into details on some aspect of it, then bring up an applied example with a slide of assembly and completely forget to tie things back to what he was originally talking about. Other times he'd put up a slide full of random debugging output and explain maybe a quarter of it before moving onto the next slide, then return to the original slide 5 minutes later after having gone off in a separate direction entirely. Suffice it to say that, even though the examples were helpful, you'd need to spend a ton of time just thinking about them on your own because the explanations in class usually wouldn't be enough.

c) The slides used in the pre-lectures were old and taken straight from other sources. Reinman would sometimes write on them, but his handwriting was a bit tough to read. Again, not the worst thing in the world, but it showed that Reinman put very little effort into his visual aids. This spilled over into in-class lectures, which often similarly consisted of Reinman scrawling sloppy diagrams and notes on the whiteboard that confused me more than if I were to just attend lecture with my eyes closed.

d) The discussions were mandatory for some reason. I honestly don't quite get the logic behind this; the structure was identical to the discussion content in CS 31 and 32 and even 35L (TA presents slides, LA runs through a worksheet), and none of those classes had mandatory discussions. There's a case to be made for the content of CS 33 being more foreign to most people, but even then, mandatory discussions?

e) By the time the midterm rolled around, Reinman seemed to be rather burnt out with us as a class. After the midterms were graded, he sent out a long email basically accusing us of cheating because the midterm (which we were given 45 minutes for) average was lower than the average on one of the labs (for which we had 2 weeks).

Reinman isn't a *horrible* professor, but he isn't a particularly good one. All of the flaws with the class seem like they could be easily fixed with some actual effort on his part. If he were to clean up the visuals and not be so snarky about the test averages, I might have even liked him and the class. However, as it stands CS 33 is hard enough conceptually without a class structured as poorly as this one.

This class has too hard exams. Some of the homework has bugs.

Class with a lot of material. Work was not too hard, but there's a lot of different topics that are covered and it can sometimes be confusing on what to focus on. Labs are pretty fun, but can be a bit tricky if you are not too familiar with the material. These sometimes have extra credit. Tests were not too bad, but it was difficult to get partial credit, which was bad for quite a bit of people based on the group chats. Personally found it difficult to concentrate during lectures, but that may be due to spring quarter distance learning. You'll learn a lot.

While I didn't find Reinman to be the most engaging lecturer ever (I guess its because everyone CS lecturer seems a little dull after Carey's class), I can't deny the fact that he did an outstanding job teaching the class. He made me feel very comfortable in his class and answered all the questions everybody had.
He also appears to be willing to increase the weight of your final to make up for poor midterms if you show a demonstrable improvement on the final. He does use a flipped-classroom approach and also has 4 hours of live lecture every week, which means there is a lot of lecture to attend. However, I found most of this to be very useful to help understanding course material. It is very evidence that Reinman wants students to do as well as possible in his class and to master the material.
The midterm was very reasonable though the final was quite difficult in my opinion.
Overall I definitely recommend this class. Reinman is an outstanding professor and definitely deserves all the praise he has received.

Lectures:
Reinman adopted a flipped-classroom approach; we watched recorded lectures at home, and Reinman answered questions and solved problems in class. The recorded lectures were dense with information and felt long. With regard to the in-class lecture, it was hard to follow if you didn't have a good grasp of the material from the video from the night before. I personally don't like flipped classrooms, but I didn't find Reinman's approach too bad. I tried to get a high-level idea of the material from the lectures, and I felt I really learned the material when doing the labs and homework.

Labs and Homework:
The answers are all online, but it really does pay off to do them the right way. The labs and homework will prepare you well for exams.

Midterm:
I think the questions on the midterm were fair, and they covered material that we had learned in lectures and through homework/labs. The issue was timing; I felt rushed, and I'm sure others did too given the midterm had the lowest average he had seen in 20+ years.

Final:
The final was fair, but it did have some difficult questions (the difficult questions were accompanied with partial credit though, so if you had any idea about the answer, it would be beneficial to write something down—this is mainly with respect to the attack-lab-esque question). One of the questions was an exact copy from the midterm, but only 60% of students got it correct? I don't know how that's possible, and I honestly think it reflects our (the students') ability much more than it does Reinman's teaching ability.

In all, I learned a lot in this class. It was difficult, and you really did have to put in the effort to learn a concept if you didn't understand it immediately from a lecture. Reinman was a good professor, and I recommend taking CS 33 with him if you will work to master the material and practice applying it.

bad class, nonsensical grading scheme

would take rhinoman over nachenberg in a 1v1 arm wrestling match to the death. 10/10 could not give the man higher praise.

I don't know why his past reviews rate him so highly. Most people who took the class in spring 2022 did not have positive views of Reinman.

To begin, Reinman uses the flipped classroom model. His prelecture videos goes through the material extremely fast, and I personally don't feel like he describes the material in a clear way. The lectures themselves were hard to follow because of how so many people asked questions in the class and how the professor constantly jumps around between different topics when talking about the material. I get that the flipped classroom model is intended so that lectures are designed to go through examples and give a chance of students to ask questions, but I personally feel like it just doesn't work well when you have hundreds of students in the class.

As for the tests, the questions were absolutely hard. The professor likes to blame the poor performance on the tests on students not properly doing homework and labs, but I would argue that the tests are still hard even if you did everything properly. For example, one of the questions on the midterms was way harder than the question given on homework on the similar topic.

Personally, I would take CS 33 with Nowatzki in the fall.

Don't be fooled by the grade distribution either. Way less people get an A or A- than the distribution on Bruinwalk suggests.

His not as good as Carey, but still a very nice tracher

+ Reinman is a great lecturer. If I had to take this course again I would definitely take it with him. I liked the labs. They were very interesting and way easier than cs32 ones (for me) although the concepts are harder.

- The class uses a flipped classroom so it takes a lot of time and you have to watch the lecture videos beforehand. Try to not fall behind in this class, because the content moves quickly. I fell behind during the last weeks and it made the parallel lab hard for me even though we had 3 weeks to do it.

Note: I only took the midterm. It was not easy to be honest but doable especially if you have studied and did the labs on your own then you are good.