6 kyu
Visa application centre
59St3f4n
Loading description...
Fundamentals
.avif)
This comment has been reported as {{ abuseKindText }}.
Show
This comment has been hidden. You can view it now .
This comment can not be viewed.
- |
- Reply
- Edit
- View Solution
- Expand 1 Reply Expand {{ comments?.length }} replies
- Collapse
- Spoiler
- Remove
- Remove comment & replies
- Report
{{ fetchSolutionsError }}
-
-
Your rendered github-flavored markdown will appear here.
-
Label this discussion...
-
No Label
Keep the comment unlabeled if none of the below applies.
-
Issue
Use the issue label when reporting problems with the kata.
Be sure to explain the problem clearly and include the steps to reproduce. -
Suggestion
Use the suggestion label if you have feedback on how this kata can be improved.
-
Question
Use the question label if you have questions and/or need help solving the kata.
Don't forget to mention the language you're using, and mark as having spoiler if you include your solution.
-
No Label
- Cancel
Commenting is not allowed on this discussion
You cannot view this solution
There is no solution to show
Please sign in or sign up to leave a comment.
Tests should properly compare actual/expected values instead of iterating over the indices of
expectedand checking thatactual[i] === expected[i]which simply breaks if the filter is incorrect.Tests only check the values stored in the
visaExpirationandinsuranceIdfields, not that they come together with the original data.Hi,
no sample tests
the inclusiveness of the expiration date (90 days) isn't specified
... "wut!?":
=> freeze it, but don't assign it.
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
PS. I didn't figure out how to delete my own comments. Is it possible? It looks like if a comment has replys it's impossible :(.
Your tests need to use passport expiration dates that are assigned relative to today's date rather than fixed -- with the third test in both the example and full tests I'm getting the error message
but when I have my code console.log the passport expiration dates --
all of them are less than 90 days from now.
Wow, strange that this went unnoticed till now. There are random tests relative to today already but I guess I'll have to delete all the example tests. I'll take a look later today, thx for noticing :)
I guess no one has done this one for a while.
Ok I think that's it, you can try it out if you like. Just that now there are no example tests :(
It worked for me now, cool! But the same example tests are still there. Maybe you should just edit the passport expiration dates for the people you want accepted in the example tests to be many years in the future.
I think you have to reset the kata (the button on the left side of example tests button), to see the changes. When I try the kata again I see only a comment that I left in the example test section.
i guess that makes sense in case people had been modifying the example tests for their own debugging use. But yeah, if I click TRAIN AGAIN I see what you describe.
Hi, your "visaExpiration" tests don't work. Haven't looked for details, but my code works without setting/using .visaExpiration;-)...
Hey smile, can you try it out now? I've been having a lot of timeout issues and had a hard time making changes. But you spotted an important error which I think should be fine now.
Hi Stefan, same to me (timeouts), but your error is fixed now, don't know why my solution is still valid (can't submit it again), but perhaps because of codewars problems. My second solution (shorter one) should work and it was no problem to submit too;-). So this point seems ok now - good work;-)! By the way good kata too:-)!
In one place objects were passed by reference so that messed everything up. I'm glad you liked it :)
The desired return type could be a lot more clear... took me a while to grasp what you wanted back.
What exactly did you have in mind?
Nothing much, maybe a section called "Function should return" that states you want the same array back, with the inelligable people removed, and the elligable objects modified. It's a minor nit-pick, and I don't mean to raise it as anything important... it'd just help to digest the problem faster.
I've tried modifying the description but the kata editor is really buggy, server keeps timing out. So tomorrow I'll add a sentence like this
In other words the function should return the same array back, with the inelligable people removed, and the elligable objects modified.Thx for your time.This comment has been hidden.
I'm checking it out. Thx for noticing :)
Ok try it now and let me know if you can :)
I got that too, submitted just now.
Could you try it out once again and let me know, cuz I modified the code but there still seems to be a problem. If it still asks for that function let me know and I'll unpublish and redo the kata. Thx.
Yeah, that got it.