-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 543
reverse-string: Update function template to use a variable name instead of an underscore #438
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
Conversation
…ad of an underscore
@cbzehner I'm not inclined to merge this as is; as I explained here, one of my goals as a track maintainer is to ensure that the stubs compile without warning as much as possible. Adding an unused variable to a function works against that goal. However, I can see how the use of the underscore here might be confusing to someone new to the language. In my mind, this is a documentation issue. I'd like you to update this PR with some subset of the following changes:
|
That's good feedback, thanks! Keeping the code warning-free seems like a reasonable goal here. How would you feel about passing the variable to unimplemented initially in order to silence the unused variable warning? Something like:
|
Does that work? I've never seen |
It works! I'm surprised but I like this approach. |
…ad of an underscore
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me, thanks @cbzehner!
There are no pending change requests from anyone, so unless something is discovered in the interim, I'll plan to merge this on 2 March. If after that date I still haven't, please feel free to ping me to remind me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This question won't affect whether this PR should be merged: To what extent would we like similar changes to be made on any other exercises that contain a non-empty stub?
I'm happy to leave it on an as-needed basis, prompted by students filing
issues and PRs. (Yes, I'm applying lazy evaluation to real-life
responsibilities here.) Consistency is nice, but not essential in this case.
…On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:18 PM, Peter Tseng ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** approved this pull request.
This question won't affect whether this PR should be merged: To what
extent would we like similar changes to be made on any other exercises that
contain a non-empty stub?
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#438 (review)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AHdeTs2jqLBzz5f9YaMJFEEXNr3JB8zRks5tZHEQgaJpZM4SSflZ>
.
|
I think the underscore is arcane knowledge for a beginner, so I would love getting rid of it. I prefer using a proper variable name and reference it in the I do not like the At least using a single underscore as a variable name may have the "this place is intentionally left blank" impression and it forces the student to change it because it is a compile error to use underscore as a variable. |
Would y'all mind if I open an issue for updating the stubs? I think it would be great to have it open and tag it as "beginner-friendly" to track which ones need to be updated and provide an entry point for people to get involved. |
@cbzehner I would not mind that at all, particularly if you did the work of tracking down which exercises currently use underscores in the stubs. |
Thanks y'all for all the feedback and help with this request. I know it's just as much work to review as to write this but I've learned a lot in the process and really appreciate it! |
Resolves exercism#438 Changed the parameter to `input`, and uses it in `unimplemented!()` to silence the unused variable warning.
Basically as-titled. It took me an embarrassing amount of time to figure out how to reference the
_
in the current function template (i.e. change it to something else). I've really enjoyed the Rust track so far, just trying to help clarify what I found confusing. 😄I tried to make the minimum number of changes here and ensured that
_test/check-exercises.sh
was able to validate the reverse-string exercise before submitting.