Add kindergarten-garden exercise

[keiravillekode]

Uses recently updated generator to allow for deep nesting of tests in canonical json

[github-actions]

Hello 👋 Thanks for your PR.

This repo does not currently have dedicated maintainers. Our cross-track maintainers team will attempt to review and merge your PR, but it will likely take longer for your PR to be reviewed.

If you enjoy contributing to Exercism and have a track-record of doing so successfully, you might like to become an Exercism maintainer for this track.

Please feel free to ask any questions, or chat to us about anything to do with this PR or the reviewing process on the Exercism forum.

(cc @exercism/cross-track-maintainers)

[kotp]

These are not necessary, as we have these ignored in the project root. I would remove this .gitignore file unless or until there is something "custom" specifically needed for an exercise.

[keiravillekode]

I assumed they are for the benefit of students who use git to manage their solution attempts on their local machines.

exercism/rust#353
mentions "I like to keep my Exercism solutions backed up on GitHub (e.g. https://github.com/attilahorvath/exercism-rust) and I've seen others do the same."

The following tracks currently use per-exercise .gitignore:

• elixir
• gleam
• javascript
• purescript
• rust
• swift
• x86-64-assembly

I don't have a preference either way. They were there when I started adding x86-64-assembly exercises, and I followed the existing convention.

[kotp]

Nothing here is a critique against your response. Thank you for that. Here is my reasoning...

The .gitignore files are getting delivered for the exercises, which have have nothing to do with git. Sounds like "personal choice" to me, and additional information that is not really relevant to the exercises.

A slippery slope, for that reason, as "I assume they are for the benefit of students using X editor" would also justify adding editor related things not only to that .gitignore file, but also delivering it with those things in there.

I would argue that us delivering it per exercise causes more student maintenance work, as well, and they should manage their own repositories if that is what they are doing.

I am not against having a documentation thing that describes how they can do such things, and recommended things to ignore though. But that is a one place area to maintain, and specifically for the track, rather than per exercise.

[keiravillekode]

Ack. I have removed the .gitignore file from the current PR. Note I also have a handful of other exercise-adding PRs uploaded for review. After they get reviewed/merged, I'll delete all of the track's per-exercise .gitignore files.

[kotp]

This set of changes seems to be unrelated to the purpose of the pull request.

[keiravillekode]

The generator previously did not allow for deeply nested tests.

If I omit this change, we have

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "generators/generate", line 111, in <module>
    main()
  File "generators/generate", line 96, in main
    cases = flatten_cases(data)
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "generators/generate", line 34, in flatten_cases
    add_case(cases_by_id, j)
  File "generators/generate", line 44, in add_case
    cases_by_id[case["uuid"]] = case
                ~~~~^^^^^^^^
KeyError: 'uuid'

If I just made a one-line generator change

 def add_case(cases_by_id, case):
     if "reimplements" in case:
         cases_by_id[case["reimplements"]] = case
-     else:
+     elif "uuid" in case:
         cases_by_id[case["uuid"]] = case

then generation reports no errors, but omits two test cases:

-    RUN_TEST(test_second_students_garden);
-    RUN_TEST(test_third_students_garden);

[kotp]

I did not see a separate commit for this explaining that.

Do we need maybe reform the patch and force push on this feature branch to update and separate in case one thing needs to be reverted but not the other things that may be good?

[keiravillekode]

Extracted #249 that can be merged first.

[kotp]

Because of the #249 are we going to modify this patch to exclude it? It still should not conflict, if the other is done first, but as it is it seems "off" just a bit.

I do not have enough rights on this repository to fix it up, otherwise I would do that, instead of tossing the bone back your way.

[keiravillekode]

Now modified.

[keiravillekode]

I appreciate the difficult work that you and the cross-track-maintainers-team are doing. Would it be helpful if the first commit in any new exercise was the result of a bin/create-exercise script [apart from moving up the exercise in config.json so pull requests don't all conflict]?

[kotp]

To me, it looks good.