writeup.txt

  Our main focus initially for the SPIMbot was survival - of course. We wanted to make sure that, above all else, we could at least 
survive long enough to collect some points before focusing on efficiency of collecting resources. Another factor we took into 
account regarding survival was the bed. Losing additional points for dying without a bed makes it extremely pertinent to the bots 
performance. After survival, we focused simply on collecting the hard-coded resources while maintaining the integrity of the 
survival of our bot. Keeping it simple and trying to integrate resource collection into our survival code made it easier to get 
consistent points. This strategy carried throughout our entire implementation.
  On the topic of implementation, we coded everything initially in assembly, instead of C++ and then hand-compiling to assembly. 
We realized pretty late in the implementation that this could have been more productive and quicker for the more advanced parts 
of the code, but by the time we realized it made more sense to continue in assembly throughout the entire thing.
	For the movement of our bot we decided to use BOT_X and BOT_Y since the resource blocks were hard-coded locations. 
It made more sense to do it this way to us, and as such had three functions for our movement (go_to, go_to_x, and go_to_y) to 
control the bot in a very mechanical way which made it relatively easy to track.
	One of the more crucial parts of our code came in the break_completely function, which ensures that a block is completely broken 
(as the name suggests). We calculated the offset of durability remaining on the block with 4(40y+x) at the position (x,y). 
Again, this is a survival-focused implementation, where the more complex parts of our code are focused around gathering 
resources so that the bot can survive.