"const" is there to clearly state: "if you put this variable into this function, the function guarantees that the value is not changed"

And I'd absolutely love for you to try to explain how accepting strings by copy doesn't, too, completely guarantee that the value is not changed.

That is not the case anymore. If the strings you want to put into that function are const already, you can't put them in anymore.

This is not how C++ works. If you want to start policing others, please at least make sure you know the basics of how the language works.

Please use JUnit 5 for assertions and put the tester function from Preloaded into the test suites.
Please @Order the test methods.

Not sure what you fixed here apart from replacing the solution with your own and using C# bracing style.

NICE!!!

No, its not okay. "const" is there to clearly state: "if you put this variable into this function, the function guarantees that the value is not changed". That is not the case anymore. If the strings you want to put into that function are const already, you can't put them in anymore. You first need to make non const copies of the const strings to call the function.

Clever use of ++! I had this thought too, but keep seeing comments like "Mutating inputs is discouraged." So I'll repeat it here. I think the problem is if you intend on using the value you passed as exponent later on, it will be incremented, which might not be what you expect.

Unfortunately the author of the translation dissappeared and issues were never addressed.

I'm rejecting this because it is long out of date and the author is gone.

Tip is highly valued, never knew that!

approved

• moves the testing code out of preloaded
• better assertion messages

I guess because the return type of countBits is set to size_t

it is called prefix increment

C++ approved by someone else.

Updated Java to JUnit 5 and approved.