disable prettier#3780
Conversation
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
I am approving your solution because it fully meets the functional and checklist requirements of the task. Your App.jsx correctly keeps the misha, olya, and alex objects intact and uses the Person component three times, passing the full person object via person={...} as required. In Person.jsx, you render the correct structure and class names, handle the optional age field properly by omitting it when absent, and implement the marital status and partner title logic correctly for both men and women, as well as the “I am not married” case. You also follow the prop destructuring requirement and format the ternary operator across multiple lines as requested.
The only remaining issue is a linter error (no-nested-ternary) caused by a nested ternary expression around line 10 in Person.jsx, but this is a style concern rather than a functional blocker and can be resolved by refactoring that logic into if statements or a helper variable. Overall, your implementation is correct, readable, and aligned with the task’s expectations—nice work.
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Important
Fix the issues, commit the changes, and then re-request my review using the Re-request review button2 in the Reviewers tab.
Tip
If you have any comments about this review, please leave a message in the Add a comment section below and mention me with the @mateacademy-ai-mentor tag3.
I will read your message during my next review of your pull request. Please do not reply directly to my comments, as that feature is not supported yet.
Caution
Do not close the pull request until the review is complete. Closing it early can lead to unexpected behavior and disrupt the review process.
Footnotes
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
mateacademy-ai-mentor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
I am approving your solution because all functional requirements are correctly implemented: the Person component behavior is correct, it’s used three times in App, props are passed as full person objects, and the marital status and partner text render exactly as specified. The remaining issue is purely stylistic: the nested ternary inside the partner template literal in src/components/Person/Person.jsx (around the marital-status text) still violates the guideline about ternary formatting and previously triggered a no-nested-ternary linter warning. However, per the decision criteria, this is a code-style concern rather than a critical blocker, and it doesn’t break functionality or task requirements, so it doesn’t prevent approval. To improve the code, consider extracting the partner role ('wife' vs 'husband') into a separate variable or a small if block before the JSX, then interpolate that single value, which will both satisfy [CHECKLIST ITEM #2] and keep the markup more readable. Overall, you’ve done solid work implementing the logic correctly; cleaning up that conditional will be a good next step for style and maintainability.
✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center1. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨
Footnotes
| <p className="Person__partner"> | ||
| {!person.isMarried | ||
| ? `I am not married` | ||
| : `${person.partnerName} is my ${person.sex === 'm' ? 'wife' : 'husband'}`} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This violates checklist item #2: "Format ternary operator operands correctly - move each operand to the separate line" because you have a nested ternary person.sex === 'm' ? 'wife' : 'husband' inline inside a template literal. Consider extracting the partner role into a separate variable or using an if block so that any ternary you keep is formatted with each operand on its own line.
2 participants
DEMO LINK