Skip to content

Changes to Bowling tests #269

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

Closed
IanWhitney opened this issue Oct 16, 2016 · 0 comments
Closed

Changes to Bowling tests #269

IanWhitney opened this issue Oct 16, 2016 · 0 comments

Comments

@IanWhitney
Copy link

We recently rewrote the test suite for Bowling. Since this track implements Bowling, please take a look at the new canonical_data.json file and see if your track should update its implementation or tests.

The new test suite reorders tests so that students can get to green quickly. It also reduces the number of tests so that students can focus on solving the interesting edge cases.

More details on this change are available in this issue

devonestes added a commit to devonestes/xelixir that referenced this issue Oct 20, 2016
There were some changes to the `cannonical_data.json` file for the `bowling`
exercise, so we needed to update our implementation to be consistent with the
rest of the exercises in Exercism.

This will be a breaking change for existing implementations, and there are just
flat out new requirements in the new `cannonical_data`, so I'm not 100% sure
how we want to handle that. I know it's still something we're discussing, and
I'd love to hear the input from other folks on the importance of keeping up to
date with the Exercism standard `cannonical_data` vs. not making breaking
changes.

Closes exercism#269
devonestes added a commit to devonestes/xelixir that referenced this issue Oct 20, 2016
There were some changes to the `cannonical_data.json` file for the `bowling`
exercise, so we needed to update our implementation to be consistent with the
rest of the exercises in Exercism.

This will be a breaking change for existing implementations, and there are just
flat out new requirements in the new `cannonical_data`, so I'm not 100% sure
how we want to handle that. I know it's still something we're discussing, and
I'd love to hear the input from other folks on the importance of keeping up to
date with the Exercism standard `cannonical_data` vs. not making breaking
changes.

Closes exercism#269
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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant