I’ve noticed a bug where if you write the incorrect program, it still passes the unit test:
def reverse(list):
number_of_elements = length(list)
length_till_half = number_of_elements // 2
for x in range(length_till_half):
opposite = length_till_half - x + 1
list[x], list[opposite] = list[opposite], list[x]
return list
This is a solution which should not work but still passes the tests.
I added a codeblock to your post for you so the code is readable.
Why should it not work? Does that not reverse the list?
you are only reversing from the middle??? the loopp is till the midle and not till the number of elements, LET me fix my naming error
What would this code return when called with [1, 2, 3, 4]? Is that the expected result?
It doesn’t work with larger results. Passing [1, 2, 3, 4] would give the correct result, but for larger list like [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9] the output is [6, 5, 3, 4, 2, 1, 7, 8, 9] anything above 4 elements should fail.
Yeah. It does give the wrong result with a longer list. If you adjust a single line in the code it does work correctly.
The tests correctly check the code gives the correct result for a range of inputs. The tests cannot test every single situation. Some solutions will pass on the test cases but have some inputs they don’t work on, regardless of how many and how varied the tests are. The tests are their to guide you to writing code that does the right thing, but no matter how many tests there are, it’s always possible to have code that works for all the tests but fails other inputs. As such, the goal isn’t to capture every single input and edge case (an impossible feat) but to give enough cases to guide you in the write direction.
There’s a bug with your solution; the tests are fine. The tests will never be “complete” as that’s an impossible goal.
Yeah makes sense, thanks for clearing my confusion