search

BlakeGuilloud / ganon

A javascript library
MIT License
92 stars 197 forks source link

Fix randomInRange method #760

Open emilyanndavis opened 7 years ago

emilyanndavis commented 7 years ago

There is currently a method called randomInRange that lives in /lib/randomInRange.js. It is incomplete and needs to be fixed!

randomInRange returns a random integer that falls within a given range, inclusive of the min and max integers provided. For example, randomInRange(10, 15) could return 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, or 15.

Acceptance Criteria:

  1. Running yarn test randomInRange results in tests passing.
  2. You have written a skeleton method for someone else to work on.
  3. You have written tests surrounding your skeleton method.
  4. Running yarn lint does not print any errors to the console!
  5. Optional: write one or two more tests surrounding the method you are solving to account for potential edge cases.

Please include the skeleton of a new method + an accompanying test for someone else to work on at the time of creating a pull request! A pull request will most likely be denied if it does not contain a skeleton method for someone else to work on! For more information, please read the Contributing Guide.

Thank you so much for your contribution!

jmknoll commented 7 years ago

@BlakeGuilloud I would like to work on this

jmknoll commented 7 years ago

@emilyanndavis What are you testing for with this assertion?

expect(() => randomInRange(1.0, 10)).toThrow()

javaScript doesn't differentiate between floats and ints, so for all intents and purposes 1.0 === 1

Or is there something that I'm missing here?

emilyanndavis commented 7 years ago

Oops. You're absolutely right @jmknoll ! That test was supposed to make sure the first param is an integer but, as you've pointed out, JavaScript doesn't care whether it's 1 or 1.00000. Feel free to change that 1.0 to something that won't be evaluated as equivalent to an integer. Good catch!

jmknoll commented 7 years ago

All good. I had already commented out the test by the time I submitted the PR implementing this function, but I think the other parameter tests are sufficient enough to cover for this one.