Add affine-cipher exercise #709
Conversation
|
Hello. Thanks for opening a PR on Exercism 🙂 We ask that all changes to Exercism are discussed on our Community Forum before being opened on GitHub. To enforce this, we automatically close all PRs that are submitted. That doesn't mean your PR is rejected but that we want the initial discussion about it to happen on our forum where a wide range of key contributors across the Exercism ecosystem can weigh in. You can use this link to copy this into a new topic on the forum. If we decide the PR is appropriate, we'll reopen it and continue with it, so please don't delete your local branch. If you're interested in learning more about this auto-responder, please read this blog post. Note: If this PR has been pre-approved, please link back to this PR on the forum thread and a maintainer or staff member will reopen it. |
|
Note that there are 2 trailing commas in the |
No need to create a new PR at this time. You can even do a |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks good to me, but I would make the changes to the return name in encode and decode.
I think return $ret could be correct, but it is correct for every case of returning a return, and so it is less than informative. Most other exercises use returns that are named descriptive names for their return, and according to the problem being solved.
I would like to continue that tradition for the example code.
| $ret .= chr( ( ( $a * ( ord( lc($_) ) - 97 ) + $b ) % 26 ) + 97 ); | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| return $ret; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In both cases of encode and decode the return appears to b the message (regardless of the type of message).
I would not use return $ret as it does not describe "message" as the return, in either case.
Forum discussion located: https://forum.exercism.org/t/add-affine-cipher-exercise/15516