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

twelve-days: create and validate starter implementation #683

Merged

Conversation

Smarticles101
Copy link
Member

@Smarticles101 Smarticles101 commented Jul 4, 2017

As this is exercise 20, I only provided a stub for the verse method as it was the only method used in the first test case, and I commented out the two test cases that use the verses method.

Resolves #551


Reviewer Resources:

Track Policies

Copy link
Contributor

@stkent stkent left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! This actually prompted me to think more about our strategy here - see inline comment for discussion.

public String verse(int verseNumber) {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Delete this statement and provide your own implementation.");
}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please indent with 4 spaces for consistency.

@@ -120,18 +120,21 @@ public void testVerseTwelve() {
@Ignore("Remove to run test")
@Test
public void testMultipleVerses() {
/*
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The more I think about this strategy, the more convinced I am that the net effect is more confusing than useful. I think that's because:

  • only a few exercises require more than one method;
  • that tests are commented out is potentially really non-obvious to users.

IMO it would be simpler to say: full API stubs for exercises 1-20: no stubs or class only stubs for exercises 21+ (with exceptions for really tricky signatures as in list-ops).

Thoughts, @FridaTveit @Smarticles101?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was thinking the same thing when reading the policies doc.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds good :)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Awesome; in light of that consensus, please update this PR to include stubs of both methods and no commented-out tests; I'll update the policies doc right now.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(Doc updated.)

@stkent
Copy link
Contributor

stkent commented Jul 4, 2017

Note: if you use slightly different language when referencing an issue from within a PR, you can have the issue auto-close when that PR is merged!

public String verses(int startVerse, int endVerse) {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("Delete this statement and write your own implementation.");
}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please remove the public keyword from the class and method signatures here; last change request, promise!

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll update the POLICIES doc again to capture this.

@stkent stkent merged commit ade962a into exercism:master Jul 4, 2017
redshirt4 added a commit to redshirt4/exercism-java that referenced this pull request Jul 4, 2017
- Classes as a whole removed, not just method/constructor stubs
- Commenting out tests undone per discussion, exercism#683
- Enum 'Plant' re-added to Kindergarten Garden per discussion
- .keep added to empty source folders
redshirt4 added a commit to redshirt4/exercism-java that referenced this pull request Jul 6, 2017
- Classes as a whole removed, not just method/constructor stubs
- Commenting out tests undone per discussion, exercism#683
- Enum 'Plant' re-added to Kindergarten Garden per discussion
- .keep added to empty source folders
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.

3 participants