Kata

Hi Were_Cat!

I'd be happy that you use my kata as a base for your serie.

On the other hand, I have done the following:

• The validation tests are now available during the kata completion.
• I have clarified using your words what the function Randomizer does.

I hope this is enough. Thanks for your help.

I removed the issue a sthere is no more problems.

I don't know what is the best practice for tests cases but here is what I do:

• For the kata test cases: I think the user should know what you test whitout having access to tests code. The best way to do this is to use the framework. You can describe your test and return messages to explain what is wrong:

describe('Simple tests', function() {
  it('should handle basic values', function() {
    Test.assertSimilar(factorise1(10), [2,5], 'Input of 10');
    //...
  });
  // Add more simple tests here
});

// Add more descibe blocks, such as one for "Error handling"

• For the kata test suggestion I only use very few simple test (one or two by function to test). I think suggestions should only test for general behavior.

I figured it out. The expectation is to throw an error when no more numbers remain and sequence is called (regardless of size). This needs to be added to the description.

You are right. Fixed it. Thanks!

I think the wording should be

An exception will be thrown if:

• Call next() and no more numbers remain
• Call sequence(size) and size is greater than the number of numbers remaining
• Call sequence(size) and no more numbers remain (regardless of size being passed or not)

The specific error message is not important.

Also, here are a couple other points to address:

• I suggest explicitly stating if the min and max values passed to the Randomizer constructor can be assumed to be valid (e.g., actual numbers, min <= max) or if they need to be checked. With the current set of test cases, assuming valid inputs is safe.
• There's a typo in the example: new Randommize(1,6) instead of new Randomizer(1,6)

Thanks a lot, again. Really you are helping me. I have added all your suggestions.

Looks good. Before I mark the issue as resolved, there are two more things I noticed:

• The example still has the extra 'm' in the constructor name: var r = new Randommizer(1,6); should be var r = new Randomizer(1,6);
• I think rewording the description of sequence(size) to be "...returns an array of length, size, of random numbers. If no size is passed, returns the remaining random numbers." (i.e., change that first "size" to "length" and put ticks around the argument references) will help the readability.

Did it! Thanks again!

Thanks for your feedback.

In the tests, I was replacing the Math.random method by another method that defines a fixed seed so I can control the sequence of random numbers.

Now I realize that this strategy is wrong because maybe you are using a different formula that I use to generate the random numbers.

I changed the way to test the solution and I hope this time is correct.

Yes, that works much better. Thanks!