new exercise: complex-numbers #149
Conversation
|
Hello. Thanks for opening a PR on Exercism 🙂 We ask that all changes to Exercism are discussed on our Community Forum before being opened on GitHub. To enforce this, we automatically close all PRs that are submitted. That doesn't mean your PR is rejected but that we want the initial discussion about it to happen on our forum where a wide range of key contributors across the Exercism ecosystem can weigh in. You can use this link to copy this into a new topic on the forum. If we decide the PR is appropriate, we'll reopen it and continue with it, so please don't delete your local branch. If you're interested in learning more about this auto-responder, please read this blog post. Note: If this PR has been pre-approved, please link back to this PR on the forum thread and a maintainer or staff member will reopen it. |
|
Hello 👋 Thanks for your PR. This repo does not currently have dedicated maintainers. Our cross-track maintainers team will attempt to review and merge your PR, but it will likely take longer for your PR to be reviewed. If you enjoy contributing to Exercism and have a track-record of doing so successfully, you might like to become an Exercism maintainer for this track. Please feel free to ask any questions, or chat to us about anything to do with this PR or the reviewing process on the Exercism forum. (cc @exercism/cross-track-maintainers) |
exercises/practice/complex-numbers/.docs/instructions.append.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
config.json
Outdated
| "uuid": "5591f4e1-6f72-415e-a789-12eebd712f9a", | ||
| "practices": [], | ||
| "prerequisites": [], | ||
| "difficulty": 4 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We might increase the difficulty to hard (8..10). We are asking students to implement exp/sim/cos, so this has a different level of difficulty compared to most tracks where these are simple library calls.
I used difficulty 9 for x86 meetup for similar reasons.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or perhaps difficulty 7 as you have given hints (Taylor series, number of terms) and students don't need to research how to compute the functions sufficiently accurately.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think 8 is a good compromise. Efficiently implementing a Taylor series with changing signs is still a bit of a feat, even if you get the information.
| const expected = new ComplexNumber(0, -5); | ||
| const actual = new ComplexNumber(0, 5).conj; | ||
|
|
||
| expect(actual).toEqual(expected); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My first solution attempt used (f64.neg (local.get $imag)) and failed this test case
ComplexNumber {
- "imag": 0,
+ "imag": -0,
"real": 5,
}
My next attempt matched the example solution, but I can imagine students being frustrated.
Perhaps we should use toBeCloseTo
https://forum.exercism.org/t/new-exercise-complex-numbers/15845