solution#967
Conversation
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Thank you for your work on the test file—it is well-structured and covers all the necessary scenarios! 😊 However, the implementation of the splitInteger function itself is missing from your pull request. This is a critical issue because the core requirement is to provide a working function, and without it, the tests cannot verify any functionality. Please add the implementation file for splitInteger so your solution can be considered complete. Once that's done, your submission should be ready for approval! Keep up the good 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
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Great job! 🎉 Your implementation meets all the core requirements of the task, including sorting the result as specified and ensuring the correct distribution of values. The previous suggestions to remove sorting and change test expectations were based on a misunderstanding of the requirements—your current approach is correct, as the task explicitly asks for a sorted result. All tests are present and valid, and your code is functional and well-structured. Keep up the good work!
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Footnotes
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return parts; | ||
| return parts.sort((a, b) => a - b); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Issue: Sorting the parts array before returning it changes the order of the parts, which is not required and will cause test failures if the tests expect the parts in the order they were generated. Please remove the .sort((a, b) => a - b) to return the parts in their original order.
|
|
||
| test('should sort parts ascending if they are not equal', () => { | ||
|
|
||
| expect(splitInteger(10, 3)).toEqual([3, 3, 4]); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Issue: The test expects the result [3, 3, 4] (ascending order), but the function should return the parts in the order they are generated, which would be [4, 3, 3] for splitInteger(10, 3). Update the expected value to match the correct order.
2 participants
No description provided.