Would it make sense to change the params for the solutions to take a string rather than an array? I was thrown off by the use of sort in the second solution until I realized the "str" variable was actually an array.

The problem in the book clearly requests an implementation of an algorithm that works on a string. I suppose this is something the candidate could/should check before hand so I can understand reasoning for leaving it in.

The Problem:
The answer to question 2.8 is incomplete.

The code in these answers seems to only return true or false as to whether there is a loop in the linked list, instead of the node at the start of the loop.

The Solution:
I could set up a pull request for this.

Looks like there's a solution to a different problem for the N Queens file:

https://github.com/careercup/CtCI-6th-Edition-JavaScript/blob/master/chapter08/8.12%20-%20Eight%20Queens/nQueens.js

Add a linter as part of the CI to help with clean-code.

Suggestion: Either we use an online one like HoundCI or add a DIY one as part of the TravisCI builds, e.g. standard.

Would love to see someone else take this over. It's not worth it for me currently to devote time or effort to work on this.

All the best ✌️❤️

line 18 should read:

• 'newStack', not 'numStack' --> numStack isn't defined
• additionally, it should be looking at length property === 0

function urlify(str, length) {
var arr = str.trim().split('');

arr.forEach((item, i) => {
if ( item === ' ' ) arr[i] = '%20';
});

return arr.join('');
};

Is it possible to have access to push new solutions?

Travis or Circle. Would be awesome for linting and unit testing both. Both options are free for open-source software and provide a much higher code quality for PR's.

Need to add "dawsonbotsford" to the CarreerCup org as a person by @gaylemcd or another stake-holder on the careercup GitHub group if I understand the permissions correctly.

Add instructions on How to Contribute on CONTRIBUTING.md

For this problem, why wouldn't you do something along the lines of:

var uglify = function(input) {
  input = input.trim();
  var url = input.split(' ').join('%20');
  return url;
}

I know it says that it provides with the true length of the string, but would something a long these lines not be acceptable?

The provided solution assumes that any computed compressed string "compressed" will be shorter than the provided string "string" only if the maximum count for every input is 1. This is incorrect. Take the counterexample string "abcdd" (len:5). When compressed by the given solution, the proposed compressed string is given as "a1b1c1d2" (len:8). A better solution would be to simply compare the lengths of the given string before returning.

The way that string length is compared and calculated is not correct when strings have significant entropy. See my branch showing this here @tankwan