-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 195
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
all exercises: declare compliance with x-common, where applicable #524
Conversation
Note that we don't provide the inputs explicitly, but generate them from the outputs.
Note that we expect empty list for a negative argument, and we have no representation for a null argument, so that case is dropped.
Note that we are compliant with 1.0.0, but x-common has since moved to 1.1.0, so this is currently out of date.
Note that descriptions were added since 2016-09-19, but our tests have no descriptions and they don't seem necessary.
Note that 1.0.0 -> 1.0.1 moves the add/subtract case to separate groups in the JSON. If the Haskell track would like to stay with that, then we should only declare compliance with 1.0.0 now.
We are compliant with 1.0.0, and just a small description change would get us to 1.0.1.
We complywith 1.0.0, but 1.2.0 is available.
As you may have figured out from reading the methodology: It is not necessarily the case that I always compared every single case between the JSON and our tests. There is a chance of a past error continuing to propagate, or an error in judgment today. Hard to check these things automatically. Yes, I did most of it by hand but it was not really bad because it was done while watching a show. |
Make commit:
|
As an exception to the rule of only checking 0.9.0 exercises, hello-world was also updated in this PR. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Seems great! Thanks!
notes: I should move triangle and crypto-square to the ignored section since we are currently diverging from x-common on those too. kindergarten-garden now has a canonical-data file and we are mostly compliant, just have extra cases. we might already be compliant on bowling, haven't checked since the way we test is different. we already have all the same cases of roman, but to be compliant we just need to add description, should be easy. |
The metholodogy was as such:
For all 0.9.0 exercises, check all x-common changes made since the date declared. If the only x-common changes were to convert the JSON file to the schema, declare compliance with 1.0.0. Otherwise (there were other changes before converting the JSON file to the schema), leave version at 0.9.0.
If a 1.0.x change was made that xhaskell has already complied with or does not need to, declare compliance with that too.
In no case has compliance been declared with a version > 1.0.x.
This trusts that:
Exercises already up to date (3):
Exercises updated in this PR now up to date (36):
Exercises updated in this PR not up to date (3):
0.9 exercises that remain out of date (7):
0.1 exercises not touched by this PR (4):
Ignored (8):
Exercises without JSON file in x-common (20)
Output generated by https://github.com/petertseng/x-common/blob/up-to-date/up-to-date/haskell.rb