We use cookies to ensure you have the best browsing experience on our website. Please read our cookie policy for more information about how we use cookies.
This challenge is appalingly undedefined; and that seems to be a general consensus with the only response from Hackerrank is to skip it (instead of them bothering to fix it. D- for customer service)
The input is unexplained and undefined, the output is unexplained. The objective is ambiguously vague, at best. Are we supposed to use some built in method? Are we supposed to extend an existing variable a? I mean, come on. I realize it's rudimentary challenge but have some respect.
And not even all of the test data is actually sent, in fact. If you do in fact read from STDIN you don't get the first two reads/gets(). But there's absolutly no indication that you don't have to read. And also with a method of a.range?(b,c) anyone would presume that you're definining a method on a's class or a's metaclass. The challenge success implementation is in fact neither. It specifically elludes to some method being already written for us, implying the range? method, but that's not true, either.
Cookie support is required to access HackerRank
Seems like cookies are disabled on this browser, please enable them to open this website
Ruby Tutorial - Object Method Parameters
You are viewing a single comment's thread. Return to all comments →
This challenge is appalingly undedefined; and that seems to be a general consensus with the only response from Hackerrank is to skip it (instead of them bothering to fix it. D- for customer service)
The input is unexplained and undefined, the output is unexplained. The objective is ambiguously vague, at best. Are we supposed to use some built in method? Are we supposed to extend an existing variable a? I mean, come on. I realize it's rudimentary challenge but have some respect.
And not even all of the test data is actually sent, in fact. If you do in fact read from STDIN you don't get the first two reads/gets(). But there's absolutly no indication that you don't have to read. And also with a method of
a.range?(b,c)
anyone would presume that you're definining a method on a's class or a's metaclass. The challenge success implementation is in fact neither. It specifically elludes to some method being already written for us, implying the range? method, but that's not true, either.