New practice exercise connect #718
Conversation
Added blank description "" to top level testset in order to minimize the footprint of the description being prefixed to the lower level testsets' names on the website.
|
If there is anyone @exercism/reviewers who would be interested in working with me to review some practice exercises to add to the track, please let me know. |
| @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ | |||
| { | |||
| "authors": [], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added the original author's name
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It should be your GitHub name if you're the one porting the exercise to this track.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is that required? Unless it necessary for some technical reason, I would prefer to leave my name off.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can leave it off if you want. You just won’t get the additional rep points on Exercism for authoring the exercise (30 I believe). You’d only get rep for opening this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the clarification!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To be clear, it's your github username that's listed here.
Added original author's name
|
I've added my name to Edit: reverted to an empty field for author's name, since adding mine is not necessary.
|
| @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ | |||
| { | |||
| "authors": [], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To be clear, it's your github username that's listed here.
This is the practice exercise
connecttaken fromproblem-specificationswith scaffolding created by configlet.Possibly relevant points for reviewers to consider:
example.jl.connect.[ "." ], meant to complement the 1x1 full boards,[ "X" ]and[ "O" ]. Nothing was added totests.tomlin regard to this.There are further possible edge cases related to the added one above, such as:
[ "" ]0wins:[ ". . . O . X . ." ]Xwins:[ "X X X X" ]These are mostly to prevent the use of length checks , but the already added edge case above probably does enough to discourage that (e.g.
isone(length(board)) && return first(board)no longer works). Otherwise, testing seems to be sufficient to check for correctness, but a couple more tests could be added to provide more symmetry. For example, moreOwins could be added since, of the 11 original tests, there are only twoOwins, and one of those is an edge case.