Skip to content

Change 'submit' vs 'run code' response parsing conditional from judge_type to submission_id startswith 'runcode_' #61

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Galus
Copy link

@Galus Galus commented Oct 9, 2020

I am unsure if this was intended behavior, but I am unable to currently run 'LeetCodeTest' and get a 'Run Code' / 'test' submission. I am only able to run 'LeetCodeSubmit' and get back some output. After a while, I noticed the output was missing std_output for debugging. I found in the code that we chose to branch on judge_type == 'large'... I am thinking it would be better to branch on submission_id since they are uniquely formatted between Submit and Run Code.

Maybe someone can help me get my LeetCodeTest to run correctly?

INPUT:

impl Solution {
    pub fn two_sum(nums: Vec<i32>, target: i32) -> Vec<i32> {
        
        println!("nums: {:?}", nums);
        println!("target: {}", target);
        for x in 0..nums.len() {
            println!("{}", x)
        }

        vec![0, 23333]
    }
}

Example output after proposed change of LeetCodeSubmit

# Two Sum

## State
  - Wrong Answer

## Runtime
  - N/A

## Test Cases
  - Passed: 0
  - Total:  29
  - WARNING: some test cases failed

## Standard Output
    nums: [2, 7, 11, 15]
    target: 9
    0
    1
    2
    3
    

### Input
    [2,7,11,15]
    9

### Actual Answer
    [0,23333]

### Expected Answer
    [0,1]


@Galus
Copy link
Author

Galus commented Oct 9, 2020

#59

For those who wanna help me get LeetCodeTest to do more....

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant