Retired
Length of words (retired)
33dlra
Loading description...
Fundamentals
View
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.
It's not specified how to actually deal with non letters, until one enters the random test cases where this matters a lot.
Your Kata needs more extensive test coverage to prevent easy cheap-cheat solutions and/or logically flawed solutions. The most common way to increase test coverage is through the inclusion of randomly generated test cases at runtime so please add these. The lack of test coverage in a Kata as an Issue is recognised as an official CW stance.
And, please, add at least three more unique fixed tests before you even begin to add random tests. Although you do indeed have a lot of assertions due to the way that you are misusing
Test.expect
to compare two multidimensional arrays (see my suggestion below), it is apparent by reading your test cases that you only pass a total of 2 different strings to the user function which frankly isn't enough.Hi @donaldsebleung, thanks for the feedback
Please, don't ever use
Test.expect
to compare any two values other than booleans - let alone multidimensional arrays! I spent about 10 minutes on this simple task simply because the feedback messages upon failure weren't informative at all and I had to constantly useconsole.log
just to remotely get and idea of what was happening. For arrays, useTest.assertSimilar
instead and for objects (which also works on arrays) useTest.assertDeepEquals
instead.Tests appear to have been refactored to use
Test.assertSimilar
instead, well done :DHi @donaldsebleung: Thanks for you congrats at "Gitter" (some weeks ago)! Normally i don't use it, so i haven't seen until today;-)...
Wow, always same input string (random tests with new same input - so 2 errors during tests), but different expected results - where's the trick;-)?
I think tested value is not the returned array but each values of array, something like :
Test.expect( arr[0][0] == 1 ) Test.expect( arr[0][1] == 1 ) ...and so on
; ) )EDIT: I confirm every returned values are individualy evaluated.
Other than that if it can help ('cause it was not what I thought first) expected values are :
; ) )
Hi and thanks;-)! Was too lazy to look deeper here... The description is unclear, the tests too, but now there's an issue reported too;-)...
Thanks for the feedback guys, some useful input
Have added correct checking including random testing.
There are some mistakes in your random tests, look here:
For example [8,3] should be correct: cMygQSmA, MAX3tIgbe6= MAXtIgbe and IkdFfSl2i= IkdFfSli
Hi @smile67, have removed a bug that I think was causing this problem.
Hi, seems to me that it works now;-)... thanks for fixing...