'Solution' #1630
'Solution' #1630
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for your hard work on this project! 😊 While your implementation of the Person class and the create_person_list function is mostly correct, there are a couple of critical issues that need to be addressed before we can approve the pull request:
-
Handling Non-Unique Names: The use of a class variable
peopleto store instances ofPersonby name can lead to issues if names are not unique. This could cause unexpected behavior or data overwriting. Consider using a unique identifier, such as an ID, to ensure each person is stored uniquely. -
Error Handling for Missing Spouse: The current logic for setting 'wife' and 'husband' attributes assumes that these names will always be present in the
Person.peopledictionary. If a name is not found,Nonewill be set, which might not be the desired behavior. Adding error handling for cases where the spouse is not found will make your code more robust and reliable.
Addressing these issues will significantly improve the functionality and reliability of your code. Keep up the great work, and I look forward to seeing the improvements! 🚀
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
🔄 Fix the issues, commit the changes, and then re-request my review using the Re-request review button in the Reviewers tab.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great job on implementing the Person class and the create_person_list function! 🎉 While your code meets the basic requirements, there are a few critical areas for improvement:
-
Handling Non-Unique Names: Although the task specifies that all names are different, it's good practice to consider scenarios where names might not be unique. Using a unique identifier, like an ID, can help prevent potential issues.
-
Error Handling for Missing Spouse: Your current logic assumes that spouse names will always be present in the
Person.peopledictionary. To avoid potential errors, consider using thedict.get()method for accessing spouse names. This will make your code more robust and preventKeyErrorexceptions. -
Use of List Comprehension: Refactor the
create_person_listfunction to use list comprehension. This will make your code more concise and Pythonic.
These improvements will enhance the functionality and reliability of your code. Keep up the good work, and remember to review the comments to refine your solution. Addressing these issues will help you avoid similar problems in the future and strengthen your coding skills. Keep learning and improving! 🚀
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
| @@ -1,8 +1,29 @@ | |||
| class Person: | |||
| # write your code here | |||
| pass | |||
| people = {} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Using a class variable people to store instances by name can lead to issues if names are not unique. Consider using a unique identifier, such as an ID, to ensure each person is stored uniquely.
| wife = Person.people.get(pers["wife"]) | ||
| if wife: | ||
| setattr(person, "wife", wife) | ||
| else: | ||
| setattr(person, "wife", None) | ||
| if "husband" in pers and pers["husband"] is not None: | ||
| husband = Person.people.get(pers["husband"]) | ||
| if husband: | ||
| setattr(person, "husband", husband) | ||
| else: | ||
| setattr(person, "husband", None) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The current logic for setting 'wife' and 'husband' attributes assumes that these names will always be present in the Person.people dictionary. If a name is not found, None will be set, which might not be the desired behavior. Adding error handling for cases where the spouse is not found will make your code more robust and reliable.
No description provided.