These are unsolicited opinions covering several steps with the intent of offering suggestions for improvement. If I am wrong on anything, just let me know. If there is a more appropriate place for this like on Github, let me know that as well.
I am doing lesson feedback for a few reasons:
- A want to do what I can to contribute to improving learning resources for future learners.
If I get stuck on something or get confused, others probably will too. These things can be proactively improved.
-
A need to add some purpose to reviewing some very basic things for myself. Doing lesson reviews and course auditing gives that extra purpose.
-
A thought that this is an important part of my learning as well because if something comes up that I am inaccurate on, someone could correct me and improve my understanding.
I wish I had done this all through, especially going through beta sections that need feedback. I didn’t but I will start now.
This feedback is given humbly!!! I’m open to feedback on anything stated here.
Asks for destructuring to make object properties.
I have never heard this ES6 property shorthand referred to as destructuring. I think this is the wrong terminology and could be rephrased.
const {x, y} = coordinates; … this is the syntax I think of for destructuring.
If an OR is used instead of an AND the feedback provides no clue as to what the issue is.
Chain a function call to what function? I think chaining a function call is the wrong terminology. I thought what is depicted in example is currying, not most people would call function chaining. i.e. func1().func2()
I guess you could consider currying function chaining, but it might be a point of confusion.
What is difference between [\d.] and [\d|.]? … The latter fails and feedback doesn’t give any hint as to what is preferred.
Just a misprint in the “Check Your Code” dialog.
Would accurately say “Your highPrecedence function should use the return keyword.”
Might ask for a regex that captures matches of … instead of just a regex that matches.
Could give the example “This expression will look for function calls like sum(4, 1).” instead of “This expression will look for function calls like sum(1, 4).” because it would be more like an easter egg hidden reference to the band.
Improve message in check code dialog.
The code:
const toNumberList = args => args.split(',').map(el => parseFloat(el));
results in …
but is erroring because .map() doesn’t need a callback parameter but just a reference to callback and I think that is a good opportunity to reinforce an earlier point.
evalFunction() takes 2 arguments. There is instructions referring to how to pass the first argument. One would think we would need to provide a second argument in order to pass. If we do provide the second argument the code will not pass. It would be nice if it was stated for this step we are only providing the first argument.
I think it is also good for anyone interested in deepening the learning process to closely audit and comment because we are not always aware of what we need to learn. Doing things like this helps us to develop awareness of what we don’t know or misunderstandings of things we think we know.