[roman numeral] missing link to approach

In dig deeper in this exercise there are 3 link to approaches, one of which called “loop-over-romans” is missing causing link to go to HTTP-500.
I checked on github, there are only 2 approaches created for this exercise and approached mentioned above is missing.
Should I raise an issue on GitHub for that?

My mistake!

Thanks for spotting that. The approach should be called loop-over-romans, not loop-over-digits. I messed this up when adapting the document from the Python version.

Would you like to put in a PR for this, so you get the credit? If not, I’ll fix it. It needs a change to both the directory name and the config.json.

Also, it’s great to hear that people actually read these documents. Writing them turns out to be slower and more difficult than I expected, so we welcome the motivation.

With pleasure, here you are:

BTW: I was thinking how I can test my changes before making PR, is it possible for Exercism?

Yes, I read approaches, I think they are very useful addition to just browsing community solutions. I find it like mentor did the browsing for me, took the best approaches and commented on them.
So it gives additional value of assuring that I understand what happened in some solutions.
Also many times it means I don’t request further mentoring as everything is clear and my knowledge grew significantly.

1 Like

Thanks for that, I just merged it.

For testing, you can cd to the top directory of your fork, download the current configlet if necessary (bin/fetch-configlet), and use the command bin/configlet lint to run a series of checks. There may be some warning messages about old stuff, but it’s errors in your modifications that you need to look for.

GitHub will run the same tests (plus others) when you submit the PR.

Maybe there is a way to see the visits for these articles as motivation? Jeremy has some tracking for the blog posts. Maybe for the approaches as well?

If it could be done relatively easily, a way to see what tracks have implemented approaches would be useful. Erik made a Gist with that info at the beginning of the year, but it doesn’t update. I assume Erik has enough other things to do that he doesn’t want to be responsible for regular manual updates!

I’ve used the GitHub-based method from the previous discussion. Good, but it only does one exercise at a time.

We need one more small fix to make it work:

1 Like

Thanks, I’ve merged it.

Thanks for addressing this team!:muscle::hugs: