Skip to content
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

Adds additional test for two-fer exercise #733

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 7, 2017

Conversation

ilya-khadykin
Copy link
Contributor

This should close #728

I've added additional test (as discussed) somewhat specific to java track and put it in the end of the file (even though this test doesn't present in canonical-data.json for this exercise)


Reviewer Resources:

Track Policies

Copy link
Member

@Smarticles101 Smarticles101 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good :) Thanks @m-a-ge I'll merge once the build passes

@Smarticles101
Copy link
Member

Ah this is failing because the example implementation needs to include the code needed to pass the new test

@ilya-khadykin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Give me a sec, I'll try to fix it

@stkent
Copy link
Contributor

stkent commented Aug 7, 2017

Per #728 (comment), wouldn't the expected output here be

"One for , one for me."

?

@Smarticles101
Copy link
Member

@stkent I think there was a bit of a confusion. Yes, If we are going by the fact that an empty string is a valid name then the expected output you gave would be correct

@ilya-khadykin
Copy link
Contributor Author

ilya-khadykin commented Aug 7, 2017

@stkent, so, you want to see the following cases:

  1. null --> "One for you, one for me."
  2. "" --> "One for , one for me." (it looks strange to me)
  3. "Bob" --> "One for Bob, one for me."
  4. "Alice" --> "One for Alice, one for me."

right?

@stkent
Copy link
Contributor

stkent commented Aug 7, 2017

@m-a-ge correct, according to Katrina, that would be correct :) I would still place the empty string test last since it's a boundary case.

@ilya-khadykin
Copy link
Contributor Author

in that case, I have to update the code accordingly and clear the history for the last two commits.
It'll take some time

@ilya-khadykin ilya-khadykin changed the title Adds additional test for two-fer exercise [WIP] Adds additional test for two-fer exercise Aug 7, 2017
Copy link
Member

@Smarticles101 Smarticles101 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is good now

@Smarticles101 Smarticles101 merged commit 4bf6ff1 into exercism:master Aug 7, 2017
@ilya-khadykin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Smarticles101, thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Commented tests in TwoferTest Class and possibly one case missing
3 participants