ethanone1
commented
5 years ago Tom,
Thanks for reviewing my code. I’ll take another look, but I wouldn’t have submitted it had it not passed all the tests and there are 89 checks in the test script, not 26. I’m now getting the same results you are getting, so I’m completely confused, because as I said, I wouldn’t have submitted it if it weren’t passing all of them. As I run it now, some runs the “should return all employees” works and some runs it doesn’t. The “before each” hook is essentially a crash and is halting the remaining tests. The fact that this error appears on the employee post test is a head scratcher because it is sending the employee (passed) in the same line as the 201 code (failed).
Anyway, I’ll go over it again, can I resubmit it?
Thanks, Ethan
Ethan Granger Chief Technology Officer 4900 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 3000 Scottsdale, Arizona 85251 o|480.483.8100 egranger@landadvisors.com
[cid:LAO_Signature_ca1a909a-d387-4484-a62e-8227261b089b.png]https://landadvisors.com/ From: Tom Bergen notifications@github.com Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 12:10 AM To: ethanone1/xpresso xpresso@noreply.github.com Cc: Subscribed subscribed@noreply.github.com Subject: [ethanone1/xpresso] Summary (#1)
Rubric Score Criteria 1: Table Creation
- Score Level: 4/4 (Exceeds Expectations)
- Comment(s): It looks like you have included all of the proper code in your migration.js file for creating the proper tables with appropriate relationships to each other. Nice work!
Criteria 2: Implementation of API Specification and Functionality
- Score Level: 4/4 (Exceeds Expectations)
- Comment(s): It looks like all route paths and functionality are implemented to the spec. You handled all errors in each route well and also made the port configurable. Nice job!
Criteria 3: Test Case Results
- Score Level: 1/4 (Does Not Meet Expectations)
- Comment(s): After running the testing suite against your code, there were 6 test cases that were found to fail. I also had a difficult time getting your code to install properly, which seemed to have been a problem with your package-lock.json file. I have posted a screenshot of the test results below:
Criteria 4: JavaScript and Express Fundamentals and Formatting
- Score Level: 4/4 (Exceeds Expectations)
- Comment(s): You did well using JS features as well as Express features, such as middleware, route parameters, etc in your code. You also did well with the formatting of your code, which made it easy to read and understand. Nice job!
Overall Score: 13/16
Overall, you did a great job with this project. You implemented the API to spec and formatted it well, making it easy to read. You showed good knowledge of JS and Express by leveraging their features in your code. You should go back and resolve the errors that were causing those six test cases to fail. Other than that, nice work!
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/ethanone1/xpresso/issues/1, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ATMqRnx2rKvwdhlwB4FjxH3dBUie7yTbks5vNQvYgaJpZM4a6-DC.
Rubric Score
Criteria 1: Table Creation
Criteria 2: Implementation of API Specification and Functionality
Criteria 3: Test Case Results
Criteria 4: JavaScript and Express Fundamentals and Formatting
Overall Score: 13/16
Overall, you did a great job with this project. You implemented the API to spec and formatted it well, making it easy to read. You showed good knowledge of JS and Express by leveraging their features in your code. You should go back and resolve the errors that were causing those six test cases to fail. Other than that, nice work!