Skip to content

forth: Make exercise schema-compliant#688

Merged
rbasso merged 2 commits intoexercism:masterfrom
rbasso:forth-schema
Mar 11, 2017
Merged

forth: Make exercise schema-compliant#688
rbasso merged 2 commits intoexercism:masterfrom
rbasso:forth-schema

Conversation

@rbasso
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@rbasso rbasso commented Mar 10, 2017

Related to #625.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@petertseng petertseng left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note that even though you have given every group its own property, I was under the impression that the student is only expected to implement a single function (call it evaluate) - I don't think we would ask the tests to call a parsingAndNumbers function , an addition function, etc., as asking the student to implement all these functions separately seems to restrict freedom. So for any test generator, the generated code is possibly independent of the property.

Given this, I do question the property (I think there only needs to be a single value for it, "evaluate"), but it is also possible it is intentional, so if it is then I have nothing more to say.

@rbasso
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

rbasso commented Mar 11, 2017

You are completely right, @petertseng! Thanks for catching that! 👍

Any recommendation for the property name? run? forth? Ops...didn't saw you already had answered that. 😬

@petertseng
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

My initial thought was evaluate, but your suggestions of run or forth seem reasonable as well. Since all seem reasonable, I suppose we can just pick one, since there will only be one for the exercise (unless we make changes! in which case we can rediscuss then)

@rbasso
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

rbasso commented Mar 11, 2017

Rewritten with evaluate, @petertseng!

@rbasso rbasso merged commit bc4fe54 into exercism:master Mar 11, 2017
@rbasso rbasso deleted the forth-schema branch March 11, 2017 08:41
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.

2 participants