[WIP] Implement hangaman excercise

[vaibhavsingh97]

Fixes: #745

[vaibhavsingh97]

@m-a-ge I don't know much about writing test. Can you please guide me 😅

[ilya-khadykin]

I've left some comments for you to consider

[ilya-khadykin]

More tests should be added

[N-Parsons]

@vaibhavsingh97, I would suggest basing the tests on the ones from the C# track since they have fairly good test coverage.

[ilya-khadykin]

I don't like this infinite loop

[vaibhavsingh97]

@m-a-ge This loop is only if player wan't to play again

[ilya-khadykin]

You can adopt README.md from here - https://github.com/exercism/problem-specifications/blob/master/exercises/hangman/description.md

[ilya-khadykin]

@vaibhavsingh97, it's a best practice to write tests before working on an actual implementation. It gives an opportunity to analyze the problem better, find edge cases etc.
We use unittest for writing tests, docs can be found here - https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.html
You can also take a look at tests from different exercises as examples.

You can also adopt tests from other tracks

[N-Parsons]

@vaibhavsingh97

The problem-specifications//description.md suggests that this should be a functional reactive programming (FRP) exercise using an external library. Such libraries seem to exist for Python, but I know nothing about them and I don't really understand what FRP really is. Unless you know what this is and can explain and implement it, I'm going to suggest that we just modify the exercise to use a more traditional paradigm. @m-a-ge, what are your thoughts on this?

Your current implementation is going to be really hard to write tests for, because it relies on user interaction, which can't be automated through unittest (as far as I know). A better approach might be to implement a Hangman class with methods for setting/picking a word and guessing letters, and write the tests based on this approach. It might be a cool extension to include something in the README about getting people to use their new class to write an interactive game as you've done - we can't test it, but people might find it quite fun.

It would be good to put whatever new description (based loosely on the problem-specifications description) into a .meta/description.md file in this exercise folder so that your new description is persistent when the configlet is used to regenerate the READMEs.

[ilya-khadykin]

Personally, I'm in favor of adding a new exercise even if it contradicts problem-specification in some minor way.
It'll allow users to work on it, and we can always rewrite the example solutions to meet certain standards later (when we have time) by putting it to our backlog.
Such exercises shouldn't be included to core exercises though

@N-Parsons what do you think of such approach to the problems likes these?

[vaibhavsingh97]

@m-a-ge What should I do know?

[ilya-khadykin]

@vaibhavsingh97 we need more tests to be added

[N-Parsons]

@m-a-ge, sounds good to me.

[cmccandless]

@vaibhavsingh97 are you still working on this?

[vaibhavsingh97]

Yes, I forgot now will update PR

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as abandoned because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.