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
A track that lacks a representer still advertises automated analysis #6703
Comments
I think this should be:
Agree? |
Oh, I guess. You'll know better than me :) I guess the question is: do we want to say that we perform "analysis" for a solution on a track that only has a representer, but not an analyzer? I heard about plans to e.g. group solutions that have the same representation, and make things more searchable, which is in some sense "automatic analysis of the code". But I'd guess that we want to only advertise "automatic analysis" for a track that has an analyzer? So your correction sounds good to me. |
We do consider representer feedback to be automatic feedback (because it happens, well, automatically :D), so if the track has a representer and/or analyzer enabled, we'll display the message. |
Sounds good to me. So just to be completely clear: the current behavior is not desired, right? The Go track displays the message, but has neither a representer nor analyzer enabled. The majority of Exercism tracks currently advertise "automated analysis" even though, as you know, only a small proportion of tracks currently have an enabled representer or analyzer: #!/usr/bin/env sh
cd dir-containing-every-exercism-track-repo || exit
for dir in */; do
jq -r 'select(.active and (.status.representer or .status.analyzer)) | .slug' < "${dir}/config.json"
done
But I know that there's an effort to add a generic representer for every track. Aside: |
Expected behavior
The track should advertise automatic analysis only when the value of
status.representer
in the trackconfig.json
file istrue
.Actual behavior
The track advertises automatic analysis even when the value of
status.representer
in the trackconfig.json
file isfalse
.Reproduction
I mentioned this on the call last Friday. Jeremy said I should ping @ErikSchierboom.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: