Add solution for Challenge 3 by AlexO-85

[AlexO-85]

Challenge 3 Solution

Submitted by: @AlexO-85
Challenge: Challenge 3

Description

This PR contains my solution for Challenge 3.

Changes

• Added solution file to challenge-3/submissions/AlexO-85/solution-template.go

Testing

• Solution passes all test cases
• Code follows Go best practices

Thank you for reviewing my submission! 🚀

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

A new Go solution file is introduced that defines an Employee type with ID, Name, Age, and Salary fields, along with a Manager type containing a slice of employees. Four manager methods implement employee lifecycle operations: adding, removing, average salary calculation, and ID-based lookup.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
New solution submission challenge-3/submissions/AlexO-85/solution-template.go	Introduces Employee struct with ID, Name, Age, Salary fields; Manager struct with employee slice; implements AddEmployee, RemoveEmployee, GetAverageSalary, and FindEmployeeByID methods; includes main routine demonstrating usage

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

• Straightforward data types and CRUD operations with consistent patterns across methods
• Proper nil-checking in FindEmployeeByID and zero-division guard in GetAverageSalary
• RemoveEmployee uses single-pass iteration to locate and delete first match

Possibly related PRs

• Add solution for Challenge 3 by Kosench #561: Implements identical Employee and Manager types with the same four public methods for employee management operations
• Add solution for Challenge 3 by Johrespi #652: Adds the same Employee and Manager types and methods in a challenge-3 submission with nearly identical implementations
• Add solution for Challenge 3 by AlexO-85 #684: Makes the same file changes to challenge-3 submissions with equivalent Employee and Manager struct definitions and methods

Pre-merge checks

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	You can run @coderabbitai generate docstrings to improve docstring coverage.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Add solution for Challenge 3 by AlexO-85' directly and clearly summarizes the main change: adding a solution submission for Challenge 3.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description is clearly related to the changeset, providing context about the challenge submission, listing the key file added, and mentioning testing and code quality claims.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (3)

challenge-3/submissions/AlexO-85/solution-template.go (3)

21-29: RemoveEmployee logic is correct.

The slice manipulation correctly removes the first matching employee. Consider these optional style improvements:

• Line 24: Parentheses around if conditions are not idiomatic in Go.
• Line 26: The semicolon after break is unnecessary.

Apply this diff for Go style conventions:

-	    if(e.ID == id){
+	    if e.ID == id {
 	        m.Employees = append(m.Employees[:i], m.Employees[i+1:]...)
-	        break;
+	        break
 	    }

---

31-48: GetAverageSalary correctly handles edge cases.

The method properly guards against division by zero. Consider these optional refinements:

• Line 37: Parentheses around if conditions are not idiomatic in Go.
• Line 45: Reuse countEmployees instead of calling len() again for consistency.

Apply this diff for minor improvements:

-    if(countEmployees == 0){
+    if countEmployees == 0 {
         return sumSalary
     }
     
 	for _, e := range m.Employees {
 	    sumSalary += e.Salary
 	}
 	
-	avgSalary := sumSalary / float64(len(m.Employees))
+	avgSalary := sumSalary / float64(countEmployees)
 	
 	return avgSalary

---

50-58: FindEmployeeByID correctly returns a pointer.

The method appropriately returns a pointer to the employee or nil if not found. Optional style improvement:

• Line 53: Parentheses around if conditions are not idiomatic in Go.

Apply this diff for Go style conventions:

-	    if(m.Employees[i].ID == id){
+	    if m.Employees[i].ID == id {
 	        return &m.Employees[i]
 	    }

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1a06951 and aa5c7c9.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• challenge-3/submissions/AlexO-85/solution-template.go (1 hunks)

🔇 Additional comments (4)

challenge-3/submissions/AlexO-85/solution-template.go (4)

5-10: LGTM! Employee struct is well-defined.

The Employee struct with ID, Name, Age, and Salary fields is appropriate and follows Go naming conventions.

---

12-14: LGTM! Manager struct is correctly defined.

The Manager struct appropriately contains a slice of employees.

---

16-19: LGTM! AddEmployee implementation is correct.

The method correctly uses append to add employees, which is the idiomatic Go approach.

---

60-72: LGTM! Main function demonstrates the solution effectively.

The main function appropriately exercises all Manager methods and produces correct output.