Issue with: Scientific Computing with Python Projects - Budget App

The test for the check_funds method seems to be expecting the wrong answer.
It seems someone had this same issue back in July :

but the test isn’t fixed for me at least.
Idk if I’m misunderstanding something though because this problem doesn’t seem universal to everyone attempting the challenge.

It’s checking if your current balance for the object (total running balance after deposits and withdrawals in food for this example) is greater than the parameter (20 is the amount you want to “spend” so you check if you have enough money).

My poor head has trouble wrapping around double negatives so sorry if I’m interpreting things wrong.

The instructions say:

  • A check_funds method that accepts an amount as an argument. It returns False if the amount is less than the balance of the budget category and returns True otherwise. This method should be used by both the withdraw method and transfer method.

And I’m pretty sure that means, “If the amount input by the check_funds method is less than the balance, return False, if not return True.”

So if 20 is the amount the test puts in, then 20 !< 10(current balance) so the method should return True if it’s working as instructed right?

When I read and did this challenge, I guarantee I did not read past the name of the method. In code this test says:

    def check_funds(self, amount):
        if self.get_balance() >= amount:
            return True
            return False

If the balance is greater than or equal to the amount I want to spend, return true, else false.

I believe the user story needs a ‘more’ in place of a ‘less.’ You have the correct reading of the user story, but the author had a different intention.

I don’t know if it’s been done yet, but someone needs to follow the advice at the end of the aforementioned thread and report the issue.

I think my pedantry has been my greatest enemy here.
Thanks for confirming I’m not crazy.
I’ll figure out how to send a report once I’ve finished formatting that disgusting spend chart.