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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Improve test inputs for 'binary' #95

Closed
kytrinyx opened this issue Jun 20, 2015 · 10 comments
Closed

Improve test inputs for 'binary' #95

kytrinyx opened this issue Jun 20, 2015 · 10 comments
Labels
correctness cross-track consistency

Comments

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member

In exercism/exercism#2425

@odeits suggests adding the edge case "10convert01". We could also split it up into 10convert and convert10.
@kytrinyx kytrinyx mentioned this issue Jun 20, 2015
Closed
kytrinyx added a commit to exercism/ruby that referenced this issue Jun 20, 2015
@kytrinyx
binary: Add error handling
bb85b9e 
This adds some additional test cases to clarify the behavior around
the conversion of valid/invalid binary input.

See exercism/problem-specifications#95
@kytrinyx kytrinyx mentioned this issue Jun 20, 2015
Merged
@kotp
Copy link
Member

kotp commented Jun 22, 2015

Can Ruby be check-marked complete due to exercism/ruby#171

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member Author

Done.

@kotp
Copy link
Member

kotp commented Jul 15, 2015

Consistency as noted in exercism/ruby/issues/174 should be addressed.

How many of these invalid are exception based, rather than 0 based?

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member Author

I'm not sure--but I'd like to just change the README to allow for both approaches.

@kotp
Copy link
Member

kotp commented Jul 17, 2015

You beat me to it. :)

@masters3d masters3d mentioned this issue Sep 16, 2015
Merged
creature added a commit to creature/xjavascript that referenced this issue Oct 21, 2015
@creature
Extra tests for the 'binary' exercise, as discussed in exercism/probl…
c307ab5 
…em-specifications#95

This expands the JavaScript test for the 'binary' exercise to include
the same examples as the Ruby equivalent. The example solution has also
been updated so it passes the new tests.
creature added a commit to creature/xjavascript that referenced this issue Oct 21, 2015
@creature
Extra tests for the 'binary' exercise, as discussed in exercism/probl…
db727ea 
…em-specifications#95

This expands the JavaScript test for the 'binary' exercise to include
the same examples as the Ruby equivalent. The example solution has also
been updated so it passes the new tests.
@creature creature mentioned this issue Oct 22, 2015
Merged
creature added a commit to creature/xjavascript that referenced this issue Oct 26, 2015
@creature
Extra tests for the 'binary' exercise, as discussed in exercism/probl…
f4662b5 
…em-specifications#95

This expands the JavaScript test for the 'binary' exercise to include
the same examples as the Ruby equivalent. The example solution has also
been updated so it passes the new tests.
@behrtam behrtam mentioned this issue Dec 2, 2015
Merged
NobbZ added a commit to NobbZ/xelixir that referenced this issue Jan 18, 2016
@NobbZ
Added 2 invalid input testcases
b0d5698 
This is according to exercism/problem-specifications#95

Since I'm only on mobile I need to have travis do the test run for me.
@NobbZ NobbZ mentioned this issue Jan 18, 2016
Merged
@NobbZ
Copy link
Member

NobbZ commented Jan 18, 2016

I've just stumbled over a solution in the elixir track which would "convert" the string "22" to 2 * 1 + 2 * 2 = 6, probably we should not only have invalid tests with alphabetic characters but numeric chars also.

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member Author

Ah, yes, that's a good catch.

This was referenced Apr 7, 2016
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
This was referenced Apr 7, 2016
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
Closed
@NobbZ
Copy link
Member

NobbZ commented Apr 7, 2016

I'd be very happy if we get some common test data before fixing this issue. Fixing it now per track and collecting common test data afterwards and then file an issue per track again might create additional and unnecessary noise in the tracks repositories and additional confusion on commenting submissions that are against different versions of the tests.

@NobbZ
Copy link
Member

NobbZ commented Jul 7, 2016

Since we are in the process of deprecating binary along other exercises in a big sweep (#279), I think we can close this, can't we?

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah, I think we can. Thanks!

emcoding pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2018
@kytrinyx
Prevent people from using Ruby's Prime class to implement the nth-pri…
0e55df1 
…me exercise

See: Issue #95
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
correctness cross-track consistency
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@kotp @NobbZ @kytrinyx