Conversation
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Great job writing a comprehensive set of tests for the splitInteger function! You've covered several important cases. However, changes are needed because the test suite is currently failing due to an incorrect expectation in one of your tests.
In src/splitInteger.test.js, the test for splitInteger(3, 4) expects [0, 0, 0, 0]. This is incorrect because the sum of the parts must equal the original value (3). Your implementation's actual output, [0, 1, 1, 1], is correct. Please update the test to expect the correct result.
Additionally, for the splitInteger(20, 1) test, a more robust assertion would be expect(result).toEqual([20]). This verifies the entire array's structure and content, not just the value of the first element.
✨ 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
src/splitInteger.test.js
Outdated
| when splitting into 1 part`, () => { | ||
| const result = splitInteger(20, 1); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(result[0]).toBe(20); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This assertion is not strict enough because it only checks the value of the first element. It doesn't verify that the array has exactly one element as required. A better approach is to check the entire array, for example: expect(result).toEqual([20]);.
src/splitInteger.test.js
Outdated
| test(`should add zeros if value < numberOfParts`, () => { | ||
| const result = splitInteger(3, 4); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(result).toEqual([0, 0, 0, 0]); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The expected result here is incorrect. The sum of the elements in the returned array should equal the original value. In this case, splitInteger(3, 4) should return an array whose elements sum to 3. The provided implementation correctly returns [0, 1, 1, 1], which meets all the requirements. This test should be updated to expect the correct output.
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Excellent work addressing the previous feedback! The corrections you've made have significantly improved the test suite. This requires a few final changes because the submission is missing tests for some specific examples required by the task description. To complete the requirements, please add tests for the following cases:
splitInteger(8, 1)splitInteger(6, 2)splitInteger(17, 4)splitInteger(32, 6)
You are very close to finishing. Keep up the great work!
✨ 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
| const result = splitInteger(3, 4); | ||
|
|
||
| expect(result).toEqual([0, 1, 1, 1]); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great work on the existing tests! To fully meet the requirements, please add tests for all the specific examples provided in the task description, such as splitInteger(17, 4) and splitInteger(32, 6). These examples are required to ensure the function is fully verified against the specification.
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 successfully addressed all the feedback from the previous review by adding the required test cases. The test suite is now comprehensive and correctly validates the function's behavior against all specified requirements.
I am approving your solution. I have one small suggestion to improve the organization of your tests in src/splitInteger.test.js for better readability. The test description 'should split integer into equal parts' is a bit confusing because the assertions on lines 15 and 16 test cases with unequal parts. Consider moving them to the 'should sort parts ascending if they are not equal' test block to keep related tests together.
This is just a suggestion for future reference, not a required change. Great job!
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Footnotes
| test(`should return a part equals to a value | ||
| when splitting into 1 part`, () => { | ||
|
|
||
| expect(splitInteger(20, 1)).toEqual([20]); | ||
| expect(splitInteger(17, 4)).toEqual([4, 4, 4, 5]); | ||
| expect(splitInteger(32, 6)).toEqual([5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6]); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This test description is a bit confusing because it only describes the first assertion. The assertions on lines 15 and 16 test cases where the value is split into multiple, unequal parts. Consider moving them to the 'should sort parts ascending if they are not equal' test block to keep related tests together.
2 participants
func failed the last test