add task solution#1100
Conversation
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
I am approving your solution because the core implementation of splitInteger clearly meets all functional requirements: it returns exactly numberOfParts integers, the values differ by at most 1, and the array is sorted in ascending order. The function also produces the correct outputs for the specified examples such as (6, 2), (17, 4), and (32, 6), which means there are no functional blockers or broken behavior.
The only gap is in the test suite: there are no explicit tests that directly assert splitInteger(6, 2) === [3, 3], splitInteger(17, 4) === [4, 4, 4, 5], and splitInteger(32, 6) === [5, 5, 5, 5, 6, 6]. While this does not block correctness (your implementation already behaves correctly), adding dedicated toEqual tests for these three inputs in src/splitInteger.test.js would tighten the alignment with the checklist examples and make regressions less likely. For instance, you could add separate test cases like it('splits 6 into 2 equal parts', () => { expect(splitInteger(6, 2)).toEqual([3, 3]); }); and analogous tests for (17, 4) and (32, 6). Overall, your solution is solid; consider enhancing the tests to explicitly cover all example cases from the task description.
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Footnotes
|
|
||
| test('should add zeros if value < numberOfParts', () => {}); | ||
| expect(result).toEqual([0, 1, 1]); | ||
| }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The task description requires a test for the example splitInteger(6, 2) === [3, 3] (checklist item #5), which is not currently covered; consider adding a dedicated test case asserting this exact input/output pair.
|
|
||
| test('should add zeros if value < numberOfParts', () => {}); | ||
| expect(result).toEqual([0, 1, 1]); | ||
| }); |
2 participants
No description provided.