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

square-root: add exercise #408

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 25, 2019
Merged

square-root: add exercise #408

merged 4 commits into from
Sep 25, 2019

Conversation

wolf99
Copy link
Contributor

@wolf99 wolf99 commented Sep 8, 2019

Adds a new exercise to calculate the square root of a natural radicand.

Because the tests use only natural numbers up to 255, the exercise can be implemented via a simplified algorithm that uses bit shifting.

Will add readme after exercise addition PR is merged in problem specifications.

bit >>= 2;
}
return result;
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a writeup on this algorithm available somewhere? I'm curious and would like to know more.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Check the Wikipedia link from the proposed readme: exercism/problem-specifications#1582 (comment)

@wolf99
Copy link
Contributor Author

wolf99 commented Sep 11, 2019

Seems the problem-specifications repo is not accepting new exercises at the moment, but is recommending that tracks go ahead and implement any new exercise they like within the track and then add to the specifications when it starts accepting again.

So the question is do we want to add this exercise if so doing diverges from the existing specifications?

I don't mind overly if the exercise is put in WIP until whenever it can be added to the specifications (this is what has been done on the specification PR).

@ryanplusplus
Copy link
Member

@wolf99 I haven't been following the discussion upstream and didn't realize they were no longer accepting new exercises. Is there any indication of how long that might last?

@wolf99
Copy link
Contributor Author

wolf99 commented Sep 16, 2019

@ryanplusplus Nope. Have asked on the related issue on the repo (exercism/problem-specifications#1560 (comment))

However, I note a recent exercism blog post by Jeremey Walker mentions a program for structuring project anatomy is intended to cover a period of 12 months (https://exercism.io/blog/redesigning-tracks-in-partnership-with-chicago-university-and-sloan-foundation).

@ryanplusplus
Copy link
Member

@wolf99 okay, sounds like we'll be stuck in a holding pattern for a long time if we don't move forward on the C track. Will this actually show up properly in the web UI if we don't have the upstream stuff taken care of? That's the only lingering concern I have.

@wolf99
Copy link
Contributor Author

wolf99 commented Sep 16, 2019

@ryanplusplus I think it should yes. Not sure how the exercise icon will work though. For final confirmation I think just try it and see really 🤷‍♂ .

I will have to add a custom readme.md file until that PR can be merged though. I will push that shortly.

@SleeplessByte
Copy link
Member

Hi there! You may add track specific exercises WITHOUT having the problem spec one merged. There are no technical limitations here.

Make sure there is a uuid and that the slug is unique. Request an icon. The usual.

@wolf99
Copy link
Contributor Author

wolf99 commented Sep 21, 2019

I've added the exercise README and the icon is live exercism/website-icons#34.

I think this is ready for final review/merge

@wolf99 wolf99 marked this pull request as ready for review September 21, 2019 17:27
@ryanplusplus ryanplusplus merged commit 7f7fd7a into master Sep 25, 2019
@ryanplusplus ryanplusplus deleted the square-root branch September 25, 2019 23:32
@ryanplusplus
Copy link
Member

Sorry @wolf99 for not getting to this sooner

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.

3 participants