. t inject a non-Buzz word for 3

Co-Authored-By: Gregor Riegler <rieglerg85@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Nitsan Avni <nitsanav@gmail.com>
Co-Authored-By: Joel Silberman <42779942+jcs-instructor@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: 4dsherwood <4dsherwood@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-Authored-By: Matt <matthew.anderson11@gmail.com>

Author: 5 people

katas/fizzbuzz/test_fizzbuzz.py

@@ -73,7 +73,20 @@ def test_buzz(fizzbuzz_db):
     fizzbuzz_fn = make_fizzbuzz(fizzbuzz_db)
     assert "Buzz" == fizzbuzz_fn(5)
 
-def test_different_rules(fizzbuzz_db):
+# test: a non-fizzbuzz rule for 3
+
+def test_wow_instead_of_fizz(fizzbuzz_db):
+    rules = fizzbuzz_db.fizzbuzz_rules
+    # rules.delete_many(filter={})
+    rules.insert_many(
+        [
+            {"word": "Wow", "divisor": 3},
+        ]
+    )
+    fizzbuzz_fn = make_fizzbuzz(fizzbuzz_db)
+    assert "Wow" == fizzbuzz_fn(3)
+
+def test_Bang_instead_of_Buzz(fizzbuzz_db):
     rules = fizzbuzz_db.fizzbuzz_rules
     rules.delete_many(filter={})
     rules.insert_many(

session-notes/session-notes-2024-04-25.md

@@ -109,6 +109,22 @@ Joel
 - Clear intentions: helps with different ideas people might have
 
 
+### Retro 4
+
+Diana
+- I have faith we'll get there this way with the group
+- Having the db, and ask something wrong, that would fail
+
+Joel
+- Like the pattern we have
+- Something we're doing is a bit confusing
+- Maybe extract helper function for readability
+- Losing track about red / refactor
+
+Nitsan
+- Liked how we uncovered the bug for the new test, i.e., duplicate test with new rule; resulted in different failure.
+- Is this a refactoring, or are we adding functionality? Duplication can be refactored. Mainly we are still adding functionality.
+
 ### Final Retro
 
 ### How we spent our time today: