dibs: implement simple-linked-list by laurauzcategui · Pull Request #385 · exercism/python

laurauzcategui · 2016-10-26T22:39:18Z

Opened also: #384

laurauzcategui · 2016-10-26T22:42:00Z

@kytrinyx could you please review? I'm new to exercism and I was trying to figure it out if this was the right way to get started.

behrtam · 2016-10-27T09:59:26Z

linked-list is a quite similar exercise #212 which might help you while working on this new exercise. There you can see how to add the exercise to the config.json.
For possible test cases you could have a look at other tracks like C# or ruby. We use flake8 as linter (details). You might need to run that, to fix some of your code style problems.

laurauzcategui · 2016-10-27T10:11:20Z

Thanks @behrtam 👍 Fixed the issues with flake8. Will be adding test cases and other helpers with progress of the days.

Cheers,

kytrinyx · 2016-10-30T19:56:53Z

@behrtam will you have time to review (and potentially merge) before the end of Hacktoberfest (Monday, end of day)?

kytrinyx · 2016-10-30T19:57:47Z

@laurauzcategui there's a conflict in the config.json—would you mind fixing it?

behrtam · 2016-10-31T08:50:18Z

Pull requests do not have to be merged and accepted; as long as they've been opened between the very start of October 1 and the very end of October 31, they count towards a free T-shirt. – source

So, @kytrinyx there is no rush to merge this today and I will review it probably this week.

@laurauzcategui The conflict with the config.json can be resolved with a rebase of upstream/master.

laurauzcategui · 2016-10-31T11:14:37Z

Hi @behrtam, @kytrinx

Thanks. Simple-linked-list is not ready yet, but binary-search-tree I believe it is :-)

And as @behrtam said, there is no rush for Hacktoberfest :) I already received the email from digitalOcean that my PRs are valid :)

laurauzcategui · 2016-10-31T14:42:07Z

Hi @behrtam , @kytrinyx , now it's good to go for a review.

Happy 🎃

Cheers,

behrtam · 2016-11-01T13:42:43Z

Beside some details my first impression is good but we do have a more abstract problem. Normally singly linked lists insert and delete at the beginning of the list therefor the complexity is O(1). This is also the behaviour mentioned in the readme of the problem "push-down stacks (also called a LIFO stack; Last In, First Out)".
Sadly we don't have a canonical-data.json for this problem, that would make it more clear. As a result while the ruby track tests exactly for this (test_items_are_stacked), the C# track does it the other way around (Two_item_list_second_value).

Until we have canonical test data and we found a way to harmonize all the tracks, I would go with the readme and change your behaviour. push should add to the head, pop should take from the head, peek should give you the value of the head.

laurauzcategui · 2016-11-19T18:14:42Z

Hi @behrtam updated based on your recommendations. Looking for a new review :)

Cheers,

behrtam · 2016-11-22T11:33:12Z

Great! I should find some time to review that in the next days.

stale · 2017-05-06T14:48:25Z

This issue has been automatically marked as `on hiatus because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

kytrinyx · 2017-05-19T18:59:47Z

@behrtam Did this one fall between the cracks? Would you have time to give it a look?

behrtam · 2017-05-19T19:04:02Z

Oh, I'm sorry. Should finde some time on Sunday.

kytrinyx · 2017-05-19T19:12:56Z

Awesome, thanks! 🌻

behrtam

Okay, finally I found some time ...

We have decided to use stub files for all exercises (#415) so you would need to add this here as well.

Right now you have quite complex tests, one test case for each functionality. Instead I would like to see tests that are more concise (in most cases one assert per test) which work in small incremental steps. Maybe the ruby tests can be of some help: https://github.com/exercism/xruby/blob/master/exercises/simple-linked-list/simple_linked_list_test.rb

You might have to rebase to update this PR with some of the changes that happened in the meantime.

behrtam · 2017-05-28T10:48:12Z

+ self.head = head
+ self.size = 0
+
+ def push(self, new_element):


The naming needs to be improved. Right now one can push values, than the parameter should be named accordingly or the method should accept Elements instead.

behrtam · 2017-05-28T10:50:38Z

+ else:
+ return self.head.value
+
+ def reverse(self):


The convention is that reverse/sort/etc work change the actual instance, while reversed/sorted/etc would return a new changed instance leaving the other instance unchanged.

behrtam · 2017-05-28T10:52:42Z

+
+ def reverse(self):
+ new_list = LinkedList()
+ if self.size > 0:


You don't need to check size and the current element, one check is sufficient. It makes the code more understandable:
defreversed(self): new_list=LinkedList() current=self.headwhilecurrent: new_list.push(current.value) current=current.nextreturnnew_list

behrtam · 2017-05-28T10:56:38Z

+
+
+class LinkedList(object):
+ def __init__(self, head=None):


The head argument is never used. Maybe it could be used for the from array list creation instead.

behrtam · 2017-05-28T10:58:53Z

+ arr.append(current.value)
+ return arr
+
+ def from_array(self, arr=[]):


I would either implement the from_array initializer using the __init__(self, array=None) method or a @classmethod (see: https://stackoverflow.com/a/682545).

behrtam · 2017-05-28T10:58:56Z

+ return new_list
+
+ def to_array(self):
+ arr = []


This method also doesn't need two checks for the same thing. There is also no need in cutting variable names short.
defto_array(self): array= [] current=self.headwhilecurrent: array.append(current.value) current=current.nextreturnarray

behrtam · 2017-05-28T11:01:18Z

+ if self.empty():
+ return None
+ else:
+ e = self.head


No need for undescriptive short variable names, there is enough space for element = self....

kytrinyx · 2017-05-28T16:23:05Z

We have decided to use stub files for all exercises (#415) so you would need to add this here as well.

@behrtam I'd recommend documenting this in the README.

stale · 2017-07-27T17:23:04Z

This issue has been automatically marked as on hiatus because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

eliaahadi · 2017-09-08T07:43:20Z

Has this been implemented or just closed due to inactivity?

kytrinyx · 2017-09-08T18:57:04Z

This is closed for inactivity. It doesn't look like anyone else has implemented in the mean time (it would show up in this list on master: https://github.com/exercism/python/tree/master/exercises)

@behrtam reviewed it and asked for some changes. If you want to carry the changes and implement the fixes that @behrtam suggested that would be awesome.

Check out Jess Frazelle's blog post, The Art of Closing, especially point 4 "The Carry" if you're interested in helping out with this. https://blog.jessfraz.com/post/the-art-of-closing/

eliaahadi

I'd like to try implementing these changes, I'm somewhat of a newbie to git and exercism. I've done a few python exercism exercises on my own but I want to contribute to this one with alittle help. The first question is how do I go about seeing the files that need changes? Second, then after making any edits, how do I recommit them? Is it the process from this link? https://github.com/exercism/docs/blob/master/you-can-help/implement-an-exercise-from-specification.md

behrtam · 2017-09-12T14:12:19Z

Step 1) Fork this repository and clone it locally. If you don't know how to do this take a look at this guide: https://help.github.com/articles/fork-a-repo/

Step 2) Add the upstream repo as remote. Details on how to do this are here: https://help.github.com/articles/configuring-a-remote-for-a-fork/

Step 3) Fetch the PR into a local branch, to continue the work and later create a new PR. The steps on how to checkout a PR locally can be found here: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/
Keep in mind that in this case you don't want to fetch from origin but from upstream.

So, for me this looks like this:

➜ python git:(master) git remote -v
origin	git@github.com:behrtam/python.git (fetch)
origin	git@github.com:behrtam/python.git (push)
upstream	https://github.com/exercism/python.git (fetch)
upstream	https://github.com/exercism/python.git (push)
➜ python git:(master) git fetch upstream pull/385/head:carry-on-pr-385
remote: Counting objects: 80, done.
remote: Total 80 (delta 21), reused 21 (delta 21), pack-reused 59
Unpacking objects: 100% (80/80), done.
From https://github.com/exercism/python
* [new ref] refs/pull/385/head -> carry-on-pr-385
➜ python git:(master) git checkout carry-on-pr-385
Switched to branch 'carry-on-pr-385'
➜ python git:(carry-on-pr-385) python3 test/check-exercises.py simple-linked-list
.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 5 tests in 0.000s
OK
➜ python git:(carry-on-pr-385)

If you have any questions or need any help. Just ask.

eliaahadi · 2017-10-03T06:26:15Z

Thanks for information, I did steps 1 and 2. However, the checkout didn't work. The images below said local changes would be overwritten by checkout.

Any thoughts?

Other questions I have is I'm not entirely sure how to setup testing for this exercise. I looked at these links below and want to know if I'm in the right direction.

https://github.com/exercism/exercism.io/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
https://github.com/exercism/exercism.io/blob/master/docs/setting-up-local-development.md

laurauzcategui added 2 commits October 26, 2016 22:42

dibs: I will implement exercise simple-linked-list
58efa25

dibs: implemet simple-linked-list
927f136

Adding data structures pop peak empty methods and test class
29800e5

LauraU added 2 commits October 27, 2016 11:01

simple-linked-list: fixing flake8 issues
bd03ee7

including slug simple-linked-list in config.json
cfd8524

Adding data structures pop peak empty methods and test class
52d24df

laurauzcategui added 3 commits October 31, 2016 14:24

including test cases for simple-linked-list
6c3ea1e

merging with conflicting files, fixing config.json
7f2e8ca

Fixing flake8 issues on test file
795a81b

laurauzcateguiand others added 10 commits November 19, 2016 16:44

Adding data structures pop peak empty methods and test class
14a219c

simple-linked-list: fixing flake8 issues
4e81131

including slug simple-linked-list in config.json
e2f6b83

Adding data structures pop peak empty methods and test class
9ca4ff2

including test cases for simple-linked-list
71687b7

Fixing flake8 issues on test file
ed992fc

Updating unit test and behaviour of pop and push to be O(1)
44b2bf9

Merging from branch simple-linked-list
8c031c0

fixing flake8 issues and merge
6bef500

Fixing flake8 issues in Python3
93321b9

behrtam mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2017
Should we forgo any missing exercises #417
Closed

staleBot added the on hiatus label May 6, 2017

staleBot removed the on hiatus label May 19, 2017

behrtam reviewed May 28, 2017
View reviewed changes

staleBot added the on hiatus label Jul 27, 2017

staleBot closed this Aug 3, 2017

eliaahadi reviewed Sep 10, 2017
View reviewed changes

ilya-khadykin mentioned this pull request Oct 6, 2017
simple-linked-list: implement exercise #738
Closed

ilya-khadykin added the abandoned label Oct 8, 2017

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

laurauzcategui commented Oct 26, 2016

Uh oh!

laurauzcategui commented Oct 26, 2016

Uh oh!

behrtam commented Oct 27, 2016

Uh oh!

laurauzcategui commented Oct 27, 2016

Uh oh!

kytrinyx commented Oct 30, 2016

Uh oh!

kytrinyx commented Oct 30, 2016

Uh oh!

behrtam commented Oct 31, 2016

Uh oh!

laurauzcategui commented Oct 31, 2016

Uh oh!

laurauzcategui commented Oct 31, 2016

Uh oh!

behrtam commented Nov 1, 2016• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

laurauzcategui commented Nov 19, 2016

Uh oh!

behrtam commented Nov 22, 2016

Uh oh!

staleBot commented May 6, 2017

Uh oh!

kytrinyx commented May 19, 2017

Uh oh!

behrtam commented May 19, 2017

Uh oh!

kytrinyx commented May 19, 2017

Uh oh!

behrtam left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtamMay 28, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kytrinyx commented May 28, 2017

Uh oh!

staleBot commented Jul 27, 2017

Uh oh!

eliaahadi commented Sep 8, 2017

Uh oh!

kytrinyx commented Sep 8, 2017

Uh oh!

eliaahadi left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

behrtam commented Sep 12, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

eliaahadi commented Oct 3, 2017• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

behrtam commented Nov 1, 2016•
edited
Loading

behrtam left a comment •
edited
Loading

eliaahadi left a comment •
edited
Loading

behrtam commented Sep 12, 2017•
edited
Loading

eliaahadi commented Oct 3, 2017•
edited
Loading