Unit tests for Cryto Square problem don't match problem description

[wboayue]

Per problem description: https://github.com/exercism/x-common/blob/master/exercises/crypto-square/description.md

The number of columns should be greater than or equal to the number of rows. However, the java unit tests expect a solution with the number of rows is greater than or equal to the number of columns.

[jtigger]

what the....??!? @matthewmorgan, is this related to #55?

Thanks for reporting this, @wboayue !

[matthewmorgan]

Hmm...

TLDR; the crypto output is expected to be a different format than the plaintext output. I believe that the tests are correct.

I think this might just be a misunderstanding of the problem requirements, probably due to insufficient explanation in the README.

The initial mapping of the plaintext is specified:

The plaintext should be organized in to a rectangle. The size of the rectangle (r x c) should be decided by the length of the message, such that c >= r and c - r <= 1, where c is the number of columns and r is the number of rows.

So, yes, the plaintext should be r X c with c >=r, but c shouldn't be more than 1 greater than r. The example plain text is 7 rows of 8 columns.

The crypto text output could (maybe?) use a better explanation. The example shows 8 rows of 7 columns (swapped from the original dimensions) with the final column empty in the last few rows. The reason for this is the 'visual' presentation of the crypto-square.

As I recall, we opted not to provide a 'perfect square' and an 'imperfect square' explanation in the README, maybe it would be worth adding.

@jtigger @wboayue please let me know if you think I have misread the code or the issue.

[wboayue]

@jtigger @matthewmorgan Thanks for looking into this. I misread the README. I inadvertently thought the constraint applied to both the plain and cipher text, but it makes sense that the constraints flips when you build the cipher text.

[matthewmorgan]

@wboayue no worries. I would be embarrassed to tell you how extended a discussion it required for us to get this right! I was hoping we hadn't made, after all that, another mistake. 😸