Build analyzer
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100
- Issue type
- Feature
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Stale
- Tech stack
- bash
- Domain
- devtools
Research direction
Start with the analyzer interface and creating-from-scratch guides linked in the issue, then compare analyzers in other Exercism tracks. Build a track-specific analyzer that follows the interface and emits student-facing JSON analysis; if one already exists, verify the track config.json has .status.analyzer set to true and close this issue.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
In Exercism v3, we are making increased use of our v2 analyzers. Analyzers automatically assess student's submissions and provide mentor-style commentary. They can be used to catch common mistakes and/or do complex solution analysis that can't easily be done directly in a test suite.
Each analyzer is track-specific. When a new solution is submitted, we run the track's analyzer, which outputs a JSON file that contains the analysis results.
In v2, analyzer comments were given to a mentor to pass to a student. In v3, the analyzers will normally output directly to students, although we have added an extra key to output suggestions to mentors. If your track already has an analyzer, the only requisite change is updating the outputted copy to be student-facing.
The analyzer is an optional tool though, which means that if a track does not have an analyzer, it will still function normally.
Goal
Build an analyzer for your track according to the spec. Check this page to help you get started with building an analyzer.
It can be very useful to check how other tracks have implemented their analyzer.
If your track already has a working analyzer, please close this issue and ensure that the .status.analyzer key in the track config.json file is set to true.
Choosing between representer and analyzer
There is some overlap between the goals of the representer and the analyzer. If you want to build both, we recommend starting by building the representer for the following reasons:
- Representers are usually (far) easier to implement
- Representers can have a far bigger impact on the mentoring load than analyzers by empowering mentors
- Representers apply to all exercises, whereas analyzers usually target specific exercises or a subset
Tracking
- Dominant language
- Shell
- Stars
- 117
- Forks
- 99
- Avg merge
- 3h 17m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from exercism/bash
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 25/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 35/100
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 15/100
Similar issues
-
align on terminology Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
CycloneDX/transparency-exchange-api#393 · 1 comment ·
-
module/agent platform/macos type/bug/regression
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 92/100
CachyOS/cachyos-aur-derived#754 ·
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 90/100
CrowdStrike/falcon-scripts#528 ·
-
bug(cli): hapi doctor inline-media prints a fabricated B:\ helper-script path in packaged installs Open
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 70/100