GDI
Cond evaluation failing on LogLevel exercise
Hi, I’m learning Elixir by doing Exercism courses. I’m on the LogLevel exercise that has to do with Atoms and Cond, I’ve been pulling my hair out over the failing test for a cond evaluation.
Here’s the issue, in the code snippet below, if the log level is 0 and the legacy? is false, it should return an atom of :trace, otherwise it should return an atom of :unknown. The tests for the two lines that have an and operator in the cond evaluation are failing and i don’t know why. I pasted the code in my local editor and there were no errors, I’m confused. Is there something I’m doing wrong?
defmodule LogLevel do
def to_label(level, legacy?) do
# Please implement the to_label/2 function
cond do
(level === 0 and legacy? == false) -> :trace
level === 1 -> :debug
level === 2 -> :info
level === 3 -> :warning
level === 4 -> :error
(level === 5 and legacy? == false) -> :fatal
true -> :unkown
end
end
def alert_recipient(level, legacy?) do
# Please implement the alert_recipient/2 function
end
end
Marked As Solved
dimitarvp
Not sure about the rest because I don’t remember the exercise but you have a typo here.
:unkown → :unknown
Also Liked
al2o3cr
Static typing still gives you error messages you have to correctly understand to find the error; for instance, the failing test for this exercise:
will fail on the assert LogLevel.to_label(0, true) == :unknown line with a message:
1) test LogLevel.to_label/1 level 0 has label trace only in a non-legacy app (LogLevelTest)
test/log_level_test.exs:6
Assertion with == failed
code: assert LogLevel.to_label(0, true) == :unknown
left: :unkown
right: :unknown
stacktrace:
test/log_level_test.exs:8: (test)
dimitarvp
True, but let’s not forget that somebody has to make this proper test. This is a fact in this exercise but it’s not always a fact in the commercial projects.
dimitarvp
The woes of dynamic languages. 
Elixir is fantastic but Rust would have yelled at you on the first compilation.
Glad that you are unblocked!
GDI
Now I see why programmers will live and die for statically typed languages 
dimitarvp
Yep, that’s the reason. In Rust / OCaml / Haskell you just define one sum type (enum in Rust) and if you have a typo the program doesn’t compile.
Still though, for Elixir you can just start doing Ctrl-F (namely find) occurrences of what you think should be in the code and check for yourself. Or you can use grep with counting matches and you can manually verify that. There are many ways to reduce the blind spots of the dynamic languages. 
Popular in Questions
Other popular topics
Latest on Elixir Forum
Sponsor Spotlight
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
Categories:
Sub Categories:
Forums
Our Sponsors
Build Elixir applications with speed and confidence.
Supporting innovation across the BEAM ecosystem.
We build reliable cloud platforms for business-critical systems.
Catch errors, track performance, monitor hosts and more.
Practical resources that improve the lives of professional developers.
Develop your skills with books, videos, and courses.
Enabling companies to succeed by building software people love.
Courses that'll move you from confusion to "Aha, now I get it!"