Sorry if this has already been discussed, I couldn’t find an answer.
I know in the old curriculum you were allowed to use whatever tools you wanted as long as your code was publicly viewable somewhere on the internet and you had a live demo.
Since the newer curriculum automates testing with Codepen, I wonder if this is still the case. I’d personally prefer to code locally and just focus on user story features. I’d rather not concern myself about writing the ids whose purpose seems mostly for the tests.
The requirements are still that you must have a live version of your project with viewable code. You can use another service besides CodePen if you like. You can even include the tests, but it’s not quite as easy.
I guess what I really want to ask is if the tests are necessary. My submitted projects from the old curriculum were automatically submitted for the new curriculum when the curriculum changed, like the JavaScript calculator. I never had to go back and add the tests to those so I’m unclear on the necessity of them.
The main reason I ask is because I have some ideas I’d like to try for the projects but with the way I want code them they may be difficult to pass the tests. I could always make another simpler version of the project, but I figure it’s worth asking this first.
The way I did it – and probably will as I move along further is to do the exercise locally (you can still add the CDN test script in there- and chrome works best)… once I finish- I will post it on Codepen in order to make it ‘live’ but still have the local code I can store on GitHub and continue to work with them to change to how I want them (and potentially put on whatever portfolio page I have- either Git Pages, Netlify, or a domain on my friend’s host (he’s been in business for 20 plus years).
I think you can use other sources than codepen for curriculum projects but have them deployed somewhere like Heroku or Netfily or even your own personal site.