feat: add a prototype for the Guild Loot Tracker workshop

[Sebastian-Wlo]

Checklist:

• I have read freeCodeCamp's contribution guidelines.
• My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title like Update index.md)

Relates to: freeCodeCamp/freeCodeCamp#64119

• link to the related issue: Workshop – Guild Loot Tracker freeCodeCamp#64119 ,
• currently, the prototype uses for() loops and Array.prototype.sort() method,
• I couldn't figure out how to use "Object.values()" in the functions (maybe adding a function returning the sums of ingredient macros to the requirements would be a good place to implement it?)

[jdwilkin4]

Please make to include the user stories so those can be review too just in case updates need to be made there.

Also, please let us know where this falls in the curriuclum.

loops module?
review modules?
higher order functions?

we will need that information when conducting reviews 👍🏾

[Sebastian-Wlo]

Just to make sure: should the user stories be a copy of those mentioned in the related issue, or should I come up with some new ones?

As for where this lab should be placed in the curriculum - originally, it was supposed to be in the Objects module. But I think listTopIngredients(), which was supposed to return sorted output requires the use of a loop. sort() would be ideal, but it should be doable with just a for() loop (I'd definitely need to make some changes to make it work).

So, Loops would probably be the right place for it.

Thank you, I'll add the user stories as soon as I can.

[majestic-owl448]

you can use those from the issue as base, and update as needed based on changes that have been made

[Sebastian-Wlo]

Sorry! I tried to rename the branch without thinking what it would do to the PR.

user-stories.md has been added

[majestic-owl448]

wouldn't this project have a similar issue to the nutrient tracker that we are replacing because potentially triggering?

[Sebastian-Wlo]

wouldn't this project have a similar issue to the nutrient tracker that we are replacing because potentially triggering?

Possibly, in the current form at least - someone actually pointed it out after I chose the issue.
It's possible that I misinterpreted the response, but the way I understood it was that this could still be useful, but maybe after changing its subject.

I'm not sure if it means I should come up with a different theme (I'm not the most creative person out there, so it might take some time), or leave the prototype as if for now and wait for a review.

[majestic-owl448]

there are many other things that could be tracked in a pretty similar way, so the prototype is still good, there will be need to change the name of some things before it's ready tho

[Sebastian-Wlo]

The overall "theme" has been changed to a new one (thank you once more @naomi-lgbt, if it wasn't for you, I would have been stuck at coming up with something for some time).

It will definitely need changes, since getMemberTotals() is the only function that returns a string while the other return objects (incidentally, it is unfortunately the only point where I managed to find a use for Object.values() in). I hope that at least one approach is good, and can be applied to the rest of the functions.

Should I request another review for this?

[jdwilkin4]

I left some thoughts on the user stories.
But also noticed that none of these functions are being used anywhere.

From an educational standpoint, we don't want to send the message to beginners to create functions in their code and not use it. All of these functions should be used in some way so campers can connect the dots and see what is actually happening in the code. Even if it is just logging these function call results to the console.

[jdwilkin4]

Also, please update your PR title since the project was changed 👍🏾

[Sebastian-Wlo]

First of all, I'm really sorry it took me so long to add any updates.

I'm still not happy with the addLootEntry() and cloneGuildData() functions. I understand what purpose creating a shallow copy of the object is supposed to have, but it currently doesn't really add anything.
Another thing that doesn't seem right is the inconsistency between returning values and using console.log()s in the functions. I'm not sure which would work better - it seems like returning strings and logging them to the console would be the best solution, but I'm not sure if this makes the most sense here.

I hope to keep working on this, but I'd really appreciate any pointers on how to turn this into a actually useful workshop

[jdwilkin4]

@Sebastian-Wlo

it would probably be best to open up a thread on discord under naomi's sprints channel.
That way we can hash this out get more clarity on the core objectives for this lab.

[Sebastian-Wlo]

Terribly sorry it took so long! I've unfortunately been really busy.

Sorry the prototype is not up to an acceptable level. Aside from from all of the (too many) TODOs in the current version, are there any glaring mistakes that need to be addressed?

During the conversation in the Naomi's sprints channel it turned out that it's not clear the names I've used for the guild members are actually names (which I should have seen coming, to be honest).
I was thinking about using the names of the fCC staff, like it's been done in some of the previous workshops, but it didn't feel comfortable with assigning people reputation and experience arbitrarily. Would it be okay if I did that? I don't want anyone to be offended about the "stats" I'm assigning here

[jdwilkin4]

I was thinking about using the names of the fCC staff, like it's been done in some of the previous workshops, but it didn't feel comfortable with assigning people reputation and experience arbitrarily. Would it be okay if I did that? I don't want anyone to be offended about the "stats" I'm assigning here

I left a comment regarding the names. But in general, some of the staff would probably be fine having their names in the curriculum while others might not. So using fake yet more realistic names should be fine here.

[Sebastian-Wlo]

Thank you @jdwilkin4 , that list solves my problem with names!
I still need to clean up the comments and note how to divide the code into steps (I'll try to do that within the next day or two), but most of the current version is hopefully ready for the review.

One thing I was thinking about is getting rid of the listMemberNames() function and introducing both Object.keys() and Object.values() in the listMembers().
I'll stick to making any suggested changes (instead of rewriting functions because I randomly came up with a better solution), but I'd like to know if removing listMemberNames() is a good idea, or if introducing these two methods in separate functions would be a cleaner way to present them.

[jdwilkin4]

but I'd like to know if removing listMemberNames() is a good idea, or if introducing these two methods in separate functions would be a cleaner way to present them.

We can try the separate functions and then through the review process if we decide it doesn't work as well, we go back to the listMemberNames. 👍🏾

[Sebastian-Wlo]

Once again, sorry it took so long - I was too optimistic about how much time I'd have this week... On the upside, I think all of the changes I wanted to make are done, and hopefully the steps breakdown is reasonably clear.
I don't expect the prototype to pass the review on the first go, but hopefully some of it will be usable:)

[jdwilkin4]

After reviewing this and seeing this will be a workshop after the profile lookup lab, I would suggest simplifying this and keeping the core learning concepts to working with Object.keys(), Object.values(), and Object.entries()

Here is my proposed update

const guild = {
  ethan: {
    gold: 31,
    reputation: 9,
  },
  elara: {
    gold: 78,
    reputation: 12,
  },
  brandon: {
    gold: 41,
    reputation: 7,
  },
  dylan: {
    gold: 81,
    reputation: 20,
  },
};

function listMembers(guildObject) {
  console.log("Guild Members:");

  const members = Object.keys(guildObject);

  for (const member of members) {
    console.log(member);
  }
}

listMembers(guild);

console.log("------------");

function countMembers(guildObject) {
  return Object.keys(guildObject).length;
}

console.log(`Guild Members: ${countMembers(guild)}`);

console.log("------------");

function listGold(guildObject) {
  console.log("Gold Totals:");

  for (const [name, stats] of Object.entries(guildObject)) {
    console.log(`${name}: ${stats.gold} gold`);
  }
}

listGold(guild);

console.log("------------");

function getTotalGold(guildObject) {
  let totalGold = 0;

  for (const member of Object.values(guildObject)) {
    totalGold += member.gold;
  }

  return totalGold;
}

console.log(`Total Gold: ${getTotalGold(guild)}`);

console.log("------------");

function getRichestMember(guildObject) {
  let richestName = "";
  let highestGold = 0;

  for (const [name, stats] of Object.entries(guildObject)) {
    if (stats.gold > highestGold) {
      highestGold = stats.gold;
      richestName = name;
    }
  }

  return richestName;
}

console.log(`Richest Member: ${getRichestMember(guild)}`);

console.log("------------");

function listVeterans(guildObject) {
  console.log("Veteran Members:");

  for (const [name, stats] of Object.entries(guildObject)) {
    if (stats.reputation >= 10) {
      console.log(name);
    }
  }
}

listVeterans(guild);

console.log("------------");

function awardGold(guildObject, amount) {
  for (const member of Object.values(guildObject)) {
    member.gold += amount;
  }
}

awardGold(guild, 10);

console.log("After Awarding 10 Gold:");

listGold(guild);

console.log("------------");

function guildReport(guildObject) {
  console.log("Guild Report");
  console.log("------------");
  console.log(`Members: ${countMembers(guildObject)}`);
  console.log(`Total Gold: ${getTotalGold(guildObject)}`);
  console.log(`Richest Member: ${getRichestMember(guildObject)}`);
}

guildReport(guild);

[Sebastian-Wlo]

That's quite a departure from the current version, but it makes sense considering the whole idea was moved to a different section, as well as from a lab to a workshop:)
It's a shame that object cloning didn't make the cut, but it makes sense to keep the scope of the workshop more focused on a specific subject.

I like how much cleaner it looks! But there are 2 things I'd like to ask about before rewriting it:

1. Should reputation be left without any function modifying the values? It's fine, it's an exercise and not an actual management app after all (and it keeps this workshop less repetitive), but it does look a little odd to have a value and no way to change it,
2. Would it be ok to separate the "headers" of the function responses (so, "Guild Members:", "Gold Totals:" etc) from the rest of the output with ------------ and functions with just console.log("")? Either that, or removing the lines altogether - they look nice, but it's easy to get the number of characters wrong, so maybe it would be better to avoid adding them in multiple places