# Test case 4 in 7-segment display community puzzle is wrong

Test case 4 (14790) of the 7-segment display community puzzle is wrong: the expected size of the vertical segments of 1 and 4 is 4 chars instead of the specified 3.

Getting the expected display would require extra LED segments in the corners, and then it wouldn’t be a 7-segment display. Also, vertical segments of digits without the central segment (1, 4, 7, 0) would need to be extended in the middle as well for consistency.

So the fourth test case (and maybe validators) need to be fixed accordingly so that segment size is truly the specified one in all cases.

Thanks

1 Like

I think Bob is right.
Here is the correct output of Test case 4:

``````.              ####   ####   ####
# #    #      # #    # #    #
# #    #      # #    # #    #
# #    #      # #    # #    #
# #    #      # #    # #    #
####          ####
#      #      #      # #    #
#      #      #      # #    #
#      #      #      # #    #
#      #      #      # #    #
####   ####``````

Nope.

Just because they do have extended segments does not mean it is right.
The specifications require segment length 3, the expected result shows some segments with 3 and some with 4. I can’t see how this can possibly be considered right.

The segments have LEDs sometimes on their ends.

To me, the point of a 7-segment LED display is, precisely, that it has 7 fixed-length LEDs that are either entirely on or entirely off, they cannot be extended The Wikipedia picture is rather clear that way. Some types of display do have extra LEDs on extremities so they look nicer, but they are not, strictly speaking, what I would call 7-segment.

I’m not going to war on this, but if the test case stays that way, then the description is, at the very best, inaccurate and incomplete, as it does not specify the way segments need to be extended.

I think that they are extended because he wants that each 7-segment has the same height.

Maybe, but it’s still wrong to me It’s simply ambiguous regarding the description and inconsistent between digits.

For me, the output proposed by pclems54 should be the right one (except that his uses length 4 and the test case requests 3, I think).

I’ve updated the puzzle to avoid this ridiculous special cases…

1 Like

Should we have to rewrite our codes?

You already have a 100% score (but with a bad code bouh!) and we won’t recompute solutions so it’s up to you.

1 Like

I think that I will recode it with the old code after #.

Thank you