Skip to content

Conversation

@kytrinyx
Copy link
Member

The largest-series-product exercise has been overhauled as part of a project to make practice exercises more consistent and friendly.

For more context, please see the discussion in the forum, as well as the pull request that updated the exercise in the problem-specifications repository:

Note that we have deprecated and removed two test cases that deal with the multiplicative identity (also referred to as an empty product). By doing this we were able to avoid talking about this at all, which makes this exercise much more approachable.


If you approve this pull request, I will eventually merge it. However, if you are happy with this change please merge the pull request, as it will get the changes into the hands of the students much more quickly.

If this pull request contradicts the exercise on your track, please add a review with request changes. This will block the pull request from getting merged.

Otherwise, as discussed in the forum post linked to above, we aim to take an optimistic merging approach.

If you wish to suggest tweaks to these changes, please open a pull request to the exercism/problem-specifications repository to discuss, so that everyone who has an interest in the shared exercise descriptions can participate.

The largest-series-product exercise has been overhauled as part of a project
to make practice exercises more consistent and friendly.

For more context, please see the discussion in the forum, as well as
the pull request that updated the exercise in the problem-specifications
repository:

- https://forum.exercism.org/t/new-project-making-practice-exercises-more-consistent-and-human-across-exercism/3943
- exercism/problem-specifications#2246
This deletes two deprecated test cases so that we can
dramatically simplify the instructions for this exercise.
@MatthijsBlom
Copy link
Contributor

MatthijsBlom commented May 16, 2023

I feel it would be a shame to let go of the 0 span tests.

When solved idiomatically, i.e. not by indexing into the list, this problem will be solved using recursion. A base case is required anyway. It might be 1 as well as 0, but in the case of 0 it is possible that this base case is already built into some standard function, e.g. sum, and needs not be considered. I haven't investigated the relevance of this deeply for this specific exercise.

I could say that considering base cases like this is part of 'Haskell culture', but I'm not sure that is a good argument.

@kytrinyx kytrinyx merged commit 229a232 into main May 16, 2023
@kytrinyx kytrinyx deleted the sync-largest-series-product-docs branch May 16, 2023 08:36
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.

4 participants