Conversation
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Good work on creating a solid set of tests for the splitInteger function. Your test cases cover several important scenarios well. However, this requires changes because the test suite is missing tests for all the specific examples provided in the task description.
To complete the task, please add tests for the following cases to src/splitInteger.test.js:
splitInteger(6, 2)splitInteger(17, 4)splitInteger(32, 6)
Testing against all given examples is a crucial requirement to ensure the implementation is fully compliant. Once you add these, your solution will be ready for another review!
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Important
Fix the issues, commit the changes, and then re-request my review using the Re-request review button2 in the Reviewers tab.
Tip
If you have any comments about this review, please leave a message in the Add a comment section below and mention me with the @mateacademy-ai-mentor tag3.
I will read your message during my next review of your pull request. Please do not reply directly to my comments, as that feature is not supported yet.
Caution
Do not close the pull request until the review is complete. Closing it early can lead to unexpected behavior and disrupt the review process.
Footnotes
| test(`should split a number into equal parts | ||
| if a value is divisible by a numberOfParts`, () => { | ||
| const result = splitInteger(6, 3); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(result).toEqual([2, 2, 2]); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test(`should return a part equals to a value | ||
| when splitting into 1 part`, () => { | ||
|
|
||
| expect(splitInteger(8, 1)).toEqual([8]); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should sort parts ascending if they are not equal', () => { | ||
|
|
||
| expect(splitInteger(18, 5)).toEqual([3, 3, 4, 4, 4]); | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| test('should add zeros if value < numberOfParts', () => { | ||
|
|
||
| expect(splitInteger(3, 5)).toEqual([0, 0, 1, 1, 1]); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Your test cases cover different scenarios well. To ensure full compliance with the task requirements, please also add tests for all the specific examples provided in the description, such as splitInteger(17, 4) and splitInteger(32, 6).
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, the pull request review was unsuccessful for the following reasons:
Warning
No changes were made in the pull request since the last review. Please make sure that you have added files to the pull request and committed the changes.
[CODE: NCM]
If the issue is within your control, please address it.
The next review attempt will automatically launch in about 1 hour.
If you believe this is an error or need assistance, please contact the support team.
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, the pull request review was unsuccessful for the following reasons:
Warning
No changes were made in the pull request since the last review. Please make sure that you have added files to the pull request and committed the changes.
[CODE: NCM]
If the issue is within your control, please address it.
The next review attempt will automatically launch in about 1 hour.
If you believe this is an error or need assistance, please contact the support team.
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Excellent work on this pull request! You've done a great job addressing the feedback from the previous review by adding all the required test cases. The test suite is now comprehensive and covers all the examples from the task description. The submission fully meets all requirements, so I am happy to approve it.
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Footnotes
2 participants
No description provided.