merge double_factorial #9431
merge double_factorial #9431
Conversation
algorithms-keeper
bot
added
enhancement
![algorithms-keeper[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/235834?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Click here to look at the relevant links ⬇️
🔗 Relevant Links
Repository:
Python:
Automated review generated by algorithms-keeper. If there's any problem regarding this review, please open an issue about it.
algorithms-keeper commands and options
algorithms-keeper actions can be triggered by commenting on this PR:
@algorithms-keeper reviewto trigger the checks for only added pull request files@algorithms-keeper review-allto trigger the checks for all the pull request files, including the modified files. As we cannot post review comments on lines not part of the diff, this command will post all the messages in one comment.NOTE: Commands are in beta and so this feature is restricted only to a member or owner of the organization.
algorithms-keeper
bot
added
awaiting reviews
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Click here to look at the relevant links ⬇️
🔗 Relevant Links
Repository:
Python:
Automated review generated by algorithms-keeper. If there's any problem regarding this review, please open an issue about it.
algorithms-keeper commands and options
algorithms-keeper actions can be triggered by commenting on this PR:
@algorithms-keeper reviewto trigger the checks for only added pull request files@algorithms-keeper review-allto trigger the checks for all the pull request files, including the modified files. As we cannot post review comments on lines not part of the diff, this command will post all the messages in one comment.NOTE: Commands are in beta and so this feature is restricted only to a member or owner of the organization.
|
I have changed a doctest to satisfy for ruff error. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Click here to look at the relevant links ⬇️
🔗 Relevant Links
Repository:
Python:
Automated review generated by algorithms-keeper. If there's any problem regarding this review, please open an issue about it.
algorithms-keeper commands and options
algorithms-keeper actions can be triggered by commenting on this PR:
@algorithms-keeper reviewto trigger the checks for only added pull request files@algorithms-keeper review-allto trigger the checks for all the pull request files, including the modified files. As we cannot post review comments on lines not part of the diff, this command will post all the messages in one comment.NOTE: Commands are in beta and so this feature is restricted only to a member or owner of the organization.
@tianyizheng02 Sorry I didnt know about |
|
@AVAniketh0905 Please fix the failing ruff errors. Some lines are too long. |
The current test case is indeed exceeding the ruff limit. So can I change the test case? # Old Test Case
all(double_factorial_iterative(i) == math.prod(range(i, 0, -2)) for i in range(20))
True
# New Test Case
double_factorial_iterative(5) == math.prod(range(5, 0, -2))
TrueIf you confirm ill do the necessary changes... |
|
No, I already said not to change the test case. Please break that test case into multiple lines if it's too long. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Click here to look at the relevant links ⬇️
🔗 Relevant Links
Repository:
Python:
Automated review generated by algorithms-keeper. If there's any problem regarding this review, please open an issue about it.
algorithms-keeper commands and options
algorithms-keeper actions can be triggered by commenting on this PR:
@algorithms-keeper reviewto trigger the checks for only added pull request files@algorithms-keeper review-allto trigger the checks for all the pull request files, including the modified files. As we cannot post review comments on lines not part of the diff, this command will post all the messages in one comment.NOTE: Commands are in beta and so this feature is restricted only to a member or owner of the organization.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Click here to look at the relevant links ⬇️
🔗 Relevant Links
Repository:
Python:
Automated review generated by algorithms-keeper. If there's any problem regarding this review, please open an issue about it.
algorithms-keeper commands and options
algorithms-keeper actions can be triggered by commenting on this PR:
@algorithms-keeper reviewto trigger the checks for only added pull request files@algorithms-keeper review-allto trigger the checks for all the pull request files, including the modified files. As we cannot post review comments on lines not part of the diff, this command will post all the messages in one comment.NOTE: Commands are in beta and so this feature is restricted only to a member or owner of the organization.
yes sorry i didnt know we could do that. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Click here to look at the relevant links ⬇️
🔗 Relevant Links
Repository:
Python:
Automated review generated by algorithms-keeper. If there's any problem regarding this review, please open an issue about it.
algorithms-keeper commands and options
algorithms-keeper actions can be triggered by commenting on this PR:
@algorithms-keeper reviewto trigger the checks for only added pull request files@algorithms-keeper review-allto trigger the checks for all the pull request files, including the modified files. As we cannot post review comments on lines not part of the diff, this command will post all the messages in one comment.NOTE: Commands are in beta and so this feature is restricted only to a member or owner of the organization.
|
I modified your PR description to say "Contributes to..." rather than "Fixes..." because the latter will automatically close the issue. This PR helps with the issue but doesn't fix it completely. |
algorithms-keeper
bot
removed
the
awaiting reviews
I understand. Thank you for taking your time reviewing this PR. |
Describe your change:
Contributes to #8098
maths/double_factorial_iterative.pyandmaths/double_factorial_irecursive.py.maths/double_factorial.py. Which inlcudes the above 2 implementations.DIRECTORY.mdto include onlydouble_factorial.pyfile.Checklist: