Skip to content
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

test: add mixed number types for LocalMaximomPoint tests #1668

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

taekim-dev
Copy link

Open in Gitpod know more

Describe your change:

  • Add an algorithm?
  • Fix a bug or typo in an existing algorithm?
  • Documentation change?

Checklist:

  • I have read CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • This pull request is all my own work -- I have not plagiarized.
  • I know that pull requests will not be merged if they fail the automated tests.
  • This PR only changes one algorithm file. To ease review, please open separate PRs for separate algorithms.
  • All new JavaScript files are placed inside an existing directory.
  • All filenames should use the UpperCamelCase (PascalCase) style. There should be no spaces in filenames.
    Example:UserProfile.js is allowed but userprofile.js,Userprofile.js,user-Profile.js,userProfile.js are not
  • All new algorithms have a URL in their comments that points to Wikipedia or another similar explanation.
  • If this pull request resolves one or more open issues then the commit message contains Fixes: #{$ISSUE_NO}.

Copy link
Collaborator

@appgurueu appgurueu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think these help coverage since the algorithm is independent of the specific numbers and just cares about the ordering.

If we're seeing this as contract-based testing, I also consider it a bit dubious that you expect a specific maximum when there are multiple valid return values (as is the case in your first test).

All in all, I'm afraid I wouldn't support this PR - I don't see the benefit it brings.


ps. you also seem to have unrelated changes in here, though that would be easy to fix.

@taekim-dev
Copy link
Author

@appgurueu Thank you for your feedback. Based on your insights, I have adjusted the test cases to align with the behavior of the existing algorithm.

I recognize the limitation of the original algorithm in not always returning the first local maximum. Your feedback on further improvements is welcomed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants