Number Line: Extract validation out of scoring #1901
Conversation
Rename state to userInput Rename rubric to scoringData Rename rubric type
Add check for null return on validation pass Remove test helpers Rename rubric to scoringData
Update scoringData type to union with ValidationData
npm Snapshot: PublishedGood news!! We've packaged up the latest commit from this PR (47f4c3f) and published it to npm. You Example: yarn add @khanacademy/perseus@PR1901If you are working in Khan Academy's webapp, you can run: ./dev/tools/bump_perseus_version.sh -t PR1901 |
|
Size Change: +133 B (+0.01%) Total Size: 1.29 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
| // TODO: I don't think isTickCrtl is a thing anymore | ||
| if (state.isTickCrtl && outsideAllowedRange) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm guessing when exercises allow users to set their own interval, then this check was necessary in case they put in an invalid number of divisions.
I checked the number line editor, and it still has a checkbox for isTickCrtl and the json still has the field (though it defaults to not being there). I tried removing state.isTickCrtl from line 27 and all the tests still pass. It doesn't look like it is referenced anywhere other than tests and this line here. Wouldn't this always be false if isTickCrtl is not in use? Maybe this validation check hasn't been working?
Or maybe this check is not necessary if we are no longer allowing the user to set their own tick interval. It is possible to turn this to true in the editor, so I think we should only remove it if that checkbox ever gets removed, just in case it has been set to true in the past or in case anyone sets it to true in the future.
I don't think this property should be on userInput though. Should we move it to validationData? Should there be any tests making sure things work with or without this value?
| if (state.numLinePosition === start && state.rel === startRel) { | ||
| // We're where we started. | ||
| return { | ||
| type: "invalid", | ||
| message: null, | ||
| }; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it's necessary to do this check after checking if the user got it right. If the user tries to check their answer and they have not moved the dot, then it should probably be invalid. This might not be the case if the first tick could possibly be the right answer. Might be good to check with content before landing this change since this validation check gets moved.
jeremywiebe
changed the base branch from
main
to
release/server-side-scoring
Summary:
To complete server-side scoring, we are separating out validation logic from scoring logic. This PR separates that logic and associated tests for the number line widget.
Issue: LEMS-2608
Test plan: