Better sum-product factoring steps

[aelnaiem]

The function factorSumProductRule currently returns one step with no substeps, but it should have substeps. The substeps are outlined in the code, but just need to be formalized, given a change type etc.

        // 1. Break apart the middle term into two terms using our factor pair (p and q):
        //    e.g. ax^2 + bx + c -> ax^2 + px + qx + c
        // 2. Consider the first two terms together and the second two terms
        //    together (this doesn't require any actual change to the expression, so doesn't need a substep)
        //    e.g. first group: [ax^2 + px] and second group: [qx + c]
        // 3. Factor both groups separately (can be two substeps)
        //    e.g first group: [ux(rx + s)] and second group [v(rx + s)]
        // 4. Finish factoring by combining the factored terms through grouping:
        //    e.g. (ux + v)(rx + s)

This should make it easier to understand for students to understand the process for what can be a complicated set of steps.

[evykassirer]

Hey person reading this issue! If you're new to mathsteps and want to know more about what this would involve,

• The file you'd be updating for this change would be here
• I think multiplying fractions is a pretty good example of how substeps work

[alainakafkes]

Assuming this is still open, I'd like to work on it! 🙋

[evykassirer]

Ooo hi @alainakafkes thanks so much for wanting to work on this!

Right now we've put a hold on changes to mathsteps because we're doing a big refactor, but Anthony ( @aliang8 ) who's heading this up can help you find a task related to the refactor to work on, if you're interested! (he's working on mathsteps as his full time job right now!)

Sorry for the deceiving open issues heh, but very excited that you want to work on mathsteps! Let us know if you have any questions and hopefully we can find something else part of the refactor that you'd like to work on :)

[nitin42]

@alainakafkes would you like to work on the website ?

[evykassirer]

(to give more details)

The website is a demo site that will let people try out mathsteps to see how it works without having to install it locally first. 😺 Nitin's still working on the base of how it'll look so it might be a week or so (?) before we have a base codebase for that and you can contribute.

[alainakafkes]

@evykassirer Sure, I'd be interested in that. 😄 I'm pretty new to open source – I've worked on only beginner issues in the past – so I'd definitely be down to try something more challenging! You can mention me in an issue when the codebase is ready.

[evykassirer]

Perfect! I think there will be some less challenging things too (we'll know next week what exactly is going on, because we might cut some scope to get the refactor done sooner) and one thing we especially care about is that with all these changes we want to make sure the codebase makes sense to new people, so having you taking a look at things would be suuuper helpful! Will keep you posted ^_^

[aliang8]

Hey @alainakafkes, super excited for you to join! As @evykassirer said, I am working on some refactoring tasks for the current mathsteps codebase. This involves moving over to our new custom math-parser that is designed to allow support for more math expressions. This shouldn't be too difficult of a task, but I would gladly ask for your help and hopefully onboard you with the new semantic-math library.

[evykassirer]

Hi @alainakafkes ! Feel free to work on this change now - Socratic has decided to postpone the refactor. Are you still interested?

Let me know if you need help with anything! Happy to answer any questions

[alainakafkes]

Hi @evykassirer! I'd be happy to work on this – please assign me. 😸 I'll start reviewing the code and issue more carefully and let you know what questions I have. Does Socratic do most of its open source contributor communications on GitHub or is there a Slack I should join?

[alainakafkes]

I just looked at the code. Based on my understanding, what I should do is the following:

• Put the code for the existing substeps into separate helper functions (e.g., evaluateDenominators() from addConstantFractions.js)
• Use something like the following code (also from from addConstantFractions.js) to invoke the relevant helper function and "push" the substeps so they are visible

status = evaluateDenominators(newNode);
substeps.push(status);
newNode = Node.Status.resetChangeGroups(status.newNode)

Is this correct?