Retired
Lift/Drag ratio (retired)
Loading description...
Fundamentals
View
This comment has been reported as {{ abuseKindText }}.
Show
This comment has been hidden. You can view it now .
This comment can not be viewed.
- |
- Reply
- Edit
- View Solution
- Expand 1 Reply Expand {{ comments?.length }} replies
- Collapse
- Spoiler
- Remove
- Remove comment & replies
- Report
{{ fetchSolutionsError }}
-
-
Your rendered github-flavored markdown will appear here.
-
Label this discussion...
-
No Label
Keep the comment unlabeled if none of the below applies.
-
Issue
Use the issue label when reporting problems with the kata.
Be sure to explain the problem clearly and include the steps to reproduce. -
Suggestion
Use the suggestion label if you have feedback on how this kata can be improved.
-
Question
Use the question label if you have questions and/or need help solving the kata.
Don't forget to mention the language you're using, and mark as having spoiler if you include your solution.
-
No Label
- Cancel
Commenting is not allowed on this discussion
You cannot view this solution
There is no solution to show
Please sign in or sign up to leave a comment.
If you want to tell solver their inputs,
Test.it
( or justit
) is a much cleaner way thenconsole.log
.But for debugging, solver can just print inputs, and when a test fails,
assertEquals
will already tell you theactual
andexpected
values.So there may not be much added value in printing them for every test.
Fixed !
Please don't round ( or truncate ) floating point values. ( If you want the whole story, I could reproduce it, but it's been commented on other kata quite a few times already. )
The much better solution is to compare with a margin for error, either absolute or relative. For relative comparisons, CodeWars has thoughtfully provided
Test.assertApproxEquals
.That pretty much pulls out the rug from under your kata, because the division thing is not really worth it. Sorry. ( Really. )
There must be something more interesting to do with L/D; aerodynamics is quite the subject. :]
Fixed !
Errr .. no. You were still using
assertEquals
.ok