added initial solution

[vkryvytskyy]

No description provided.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good and follows the task requirements. Well done!

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly implements the 'inverseRobot' function as requested.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly implements the 'inverseRobot' function as requested.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly implements the 'inverseRobot' function. Here are some suggestions for improvement:

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly implements the 'inverseRobot' function and handles the case where object values are repeated. The code follows good practices like using descriptive variable names and proper checks for property presence in objects.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly implements the 'inverseRobot' function as required.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly implements the 'inverseRobot' function as requested.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Good job 👍Try to simplify your code, we don't need the valuesSet and the fixed object. We can check if the value already exists as a key in the fixed object using hasOwnProperty.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Try to simplify your code, we don't need the valuesSet and the fixed object. We can check if the value already exists as a key in the fixed object using hasOwnProperty.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The code looks good overall. It correctly creates a new object with keys and values swapped. However, there are a few improvements that can be made for better readability and efficiency.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider using a more descriptive variable name instead of 'propertyValues'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Unnecessary empty line, consider removing it.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

You can optimize the loop by starting from j = 0 instead of i + 1.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Good job on returning 'null' immediately when a repeated value is found.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider using a more descriptive variable name instead of 'key'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The variable names 'tempKyesRobot' and 'tempValueRobot' contain typos and are not descriptive of their purpose. Consider renaming them to 'robotKeys' and 'robotValues' respectively for clarity.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

There is no need to initialize 'tempKyesRobot' and 'tempValueRobot' with empty objects on lines 11 and 12 if you are going to assign them arrays on lines 14 and 15. You can declare and assign them in one step.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check for repeated values can be optimized. Instead of using 'indexOf', which has O(n) complexity for each check, consider using an object to track occurrences of values. This will allow you to check for duplicates in O(1) time.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Modifying the input object 'robot' is not a good practice as it can lead to side effects. Instead, create a new object and return it without altering the original 'robot' object.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The variable 'i' in the for...in loop is misleading because it suggests an index, but it's actually a key. Use a more descriptive variable name, such as 'keyIndex' or 'key'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Returning the modified input object 'robot' does not align with the task description, which asks for a new object to be returned. Create and return a new object instead.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The variable names tempKyesRobot and tempValueRobot contain typos and are not descriptive of their purpose. Consider renaming them to robotKeys and robotValues respectively for clarity.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

There is no need to initialize tempKyesRobot with an empty object on line 11 since you are assigning it a new value here. You can declare and assign it in one line.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Similarly, there is no need to initialize tempValueRobot with an empty object on line 12 since you are assigning it a new value here. You can declare and assign it in one line.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Using indexOf inside a loop to check for duplicate values is inefficient as it results in an O(n^2) complexity. Consider using an object to track occurrences of values for a more efficient solution.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Modifying the input object robot is not a good practice as it can lead to unexpected side effects. Instead, create a new object to store the inverted key-value pairs.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

This loop is unnecessary. You can invert the key-value pairs in the same loop where you check for duplicates to make the function more efficient.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's good that you are checking for duplicate values, but remember that if robot[key] is falsy (like 0, '', or false), this condition will incorrectly return null. A safer way to check if a property exists in an object is to use the hasOwnProperty method.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

When assigning the key as the value and the value as the key, it's important to ensure that the value is actually a string that can be used as a property name. If the value is not a string (e.g., a number, an object, etc.), it should be converted to a string to maintain the integrity of the object structure.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The use of hasOwnProperty is correct for checking if a property exists in an object. However, it's generally safer to call hasOwnProperty from the Object.prototype directly to avoid issues where the object might have an own property by that name. For example: Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(invertedRobot, robot[key]).

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The template literal is unnecessary here. You can directly use robot[key] as the property name for invertedRobot without converting it to a string, as object keys are automatically converted to strings if they are not symbols.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is well-structured and follows the task requirements. However, there are a few improvements that can be made to enhance the code quality.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The use of 'hasOwnProperty' is correct for checking if a property exists in an object. However, consider using 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(invertedRobot, robot[key])' to avoid potential issues if the 'robot' object has its own 'hasOwnProperty' property.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The explicit conversion to 'String' is not necessary because object keys are always strings in JavaScript. If the value is not a string, it will be coerced to a string automatically.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's good practice to include a newline at the end of the file. Some tools and systems expect or require it for proper processing.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' correctly creates an inverted object from the provided 'robot' object, checking for duplicate values and returning 'null' if any are found. However, there are a few improvements that can be made for better code clarity and performance.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The use of 'hasOwnProperty' is correct for checking if a property exists on an object. However, since ECMAScript 5, it's recommended to use 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(invertedRobot, robot[key])' to avoid issues when the object has a property with the name 'hasOwnProperty'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The explicit conversion to String is not necessary when setting the property on 'invertedRobot'. Object keys are automatically converted to strings in JavaScript, so you can directly use 'invertedRobot[robot[key]] = key;'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider adding a check to ensure that the 'robot' parameter is indeed an object and not null or undefined. This can prevent potential runtime errors if the function is called with invalid arguments.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check for property presence is correct, but it's not necessary to use Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call here. Instead, you can directly check if the value exists in the invertedRobot object using invertedRobot.hasOwnProperty(robot[key]) or robot[key] in invertedRobot which is more concise and easier to read.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The use of String(robot[key]) is redundant since the object values are already strings or can be implicitly converted to strings when used as property keys.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's good practice to check if robot[key] is not undefined or null before adding it to invertedRobot to ensure that all keys in the inverted object are valid.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is well-implemented with good use of descriptive variable names and proper checks for property presence. However, there are a few minor improvements that can be made.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Using Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call is a safe way to check for property existence. However, since you are creating a new object invertedRobot which does not inherit from anything, you can use the simpler invertedRobot.hasOwnProperty(robot[key]) or even robot[key] in invertedRobot for readability.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The use of String(robot[key]) is redundant here since object keys are automatically converted to strings. You can directly assign invertedRobot[robot[key]] = key;.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check for property presence is correct, but the object you should be checking is the 'robot' object, not the 'invertedRobot'. You want to ensure that each value in the 'robot' object is unique before assigning it as a key in 'invertedRobot'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Using String(robot[key]) is unnecessary since object keys are always strings. If the value is not a string, it will be coerced to a string automatically when used as a property key.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is correctly named and describes its purpose well.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check for property presence using 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call' is correct and ensures that the property comes directly from the object rather than its prototype chain.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Using 'String(robot[key])' is redundant since object keys are always strings. You can directly use 'robot[key]' as the key for 'invertedRobot'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function correctly returns the 'invertedRobot' object if no duplicate values are found in the input 'robot' object.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is implemented correctly and follows the task requirements. It checks for duplicate values and inverts the keys and values as expected.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider using 'Object.hasOwnProperty()' to check if a property exists on an object. While using 'in' is not incorrect, 'hasOwnProperty()' does not check down the object's prototype chain, which can be safer for property existence checks.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check for property presence is correct, but it's worth noting that using 'in' will check the entire prototype chain. If you want to check only the object's own properties, use 'robot.hasOwnProperty(key)'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check for property presence should be done using Object.hasOwnProperty() method to avoid issues with inherited properties. Directly using in might lead to unexpected behavior if the object has inherited properties with the same name as the values you are checking.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's a good practice to convert the key to a string before using it as a property name to ensure that the object keys are consistent, especially when dealing with non-string properties.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is implemented correctly and follows the task requirements. However, there are a couple of minor improvements that could be made to enhance the code quality.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider using 'Object.hasOwnProperty()' to check if the property exists on 'invertedRobot'. Directly using 'in' might lead to unexpected results if the object has inherited properties.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's a good practice to explicitly compare the property to 'undefined' to check for its existence. This makes the intention clearer and the code more readable.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check robot[key] in invertedRobot is using the in operator, which checks for the presence of a key in an object. However, since robot[key] is a value and not a key, you should use hasOwnProperty to check if the value already exists as a key in invertedRobot.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

When assigning key to invertedRobot[robot[key]], ensure that you are storing the original key as a string. If the key is a number, it will be coerced into a string, which might not be intended. If you want to preserve the type, you might need to handle it differently.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' correctly creates an inverted object from the input 'robot' object. However, there are a couple of improvements that can be made to enhance the code quality.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check robot[key] in invertedRobot is correct for determining if a property exists in an object. However, it's worth noting that using in will also return true for inherited properties. To ensure that only own properties are considered, you might want to use Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(invertedRobot, robot[key]) or invertedRobot.hasOwnProperty(robot[key]).

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

When assigning the key to the invertedRobot, it's a good practice to ensure that the value is a valid identifier or use bracket notation. Since the value of robot[key] is used as a property name, if it's not a valid identifier (e.g., a number, a string with spaces, etc.), it should be enclosed in quotes when used with dot notation. In this case, you are using bracket notation which is correct and handles all cases.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Returning the invertedRobot object is correct. The function will return either null if a duplicate value is found or the inverted object otherwise, adhering to the task requirements.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is well-implemented with proper checks for duplicate values. However, there are a few improvements that can be made for clarity and robustness.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's a good practice to use 'hasOwnProperty' method to check for property existence to avoid issues with properties from the prototype chain. Consider using 'invertedRobot.hasOwnProperty(robot[key])' instead of 'robot[key] in invertedRobot'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

When assigning the key to the invertedRobot, it's safer to ensure that the key is a string. Since object keys are always strings, if the value is not a string, it could lead to unexpected behavior. Use 'String(key)' to convert it explicitly.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' correctly inverts the keys and values of the input object and checks for duplicate values. However, there are a few improvements that can be made for better code clarity and performance.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check robot[key] in invertedRobot is correct for determining if a property exists in an object. However, it's important to note that using in will also return true for inherited properties. To ensure that only own properties are considered, you might want to use Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(invertedRobot, robot[key]) or invertedRobot.hasOwnProperty(robot[key]).

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider using Object.keys(robot) or Object.entries(robot) to iterate over the properties of the robot object. This approach avoids iterating over properties in the prototype chain and is generally considered a best practice when you only want to deal with the object's own properties.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

When assigning the key to the invertedRobot, it's a good practice to ensure that the value is a string since object keys in JavaScript are always strings or symbols. If the key is not a string, it will be coerced to a string, which could lead to unexpected behavior if the key is, for example, a number. You can use String(key) to explicitly convert it to a string.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The check robot[key] in invertedRobot is correct for determining if a property exists in an object. However, it's important to remember that using in will also return true for inherited properties. To ensure that only own properties are considered, you might want to use Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(invertedRobot, robot[key]) or invertedRobot.hasOwnProperty(robot[key]).

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

When assigning the key to the value in invertedRobot, it's a good practice to ensure that the value is a string, as object keys are always strings in JavaScript. If the original key in the robot object is not a string (e.g., a number), it will be coerced to a string when used as a key in invertedRobot. If this behavior is intended, then the code is correct. Otherwise, consider converting the key to a string explicitly if needed.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' correctly creates an inverse mapping of the provided 'robot' object. However, there are a few improvements and modern JavaScript practices that can be applied to enhance the code.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The variable name 'clone' could be more descriptive. Consider renaming it to 'invertedRobot' or something similar to reflect its purpose of storing the inverted key-value pairs.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Instead of using 'hasOwnProperty', which is an older approach, you can use the 'in' operator or 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call' for checking property existence to avoid issues with properties that may shadow object's own properties.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

It's good practice to check if the property belongs to the object itself and is not inherited from the prototype chain. You can add a check using 'robot.hasOwnProperty(key)' inside the loop.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is implemented correctly and follows good practices in naming and structure. However, there is a minor improvement that can be made regarding the check for property presence.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Consider using 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(clone, newKey)' instead of 'clone.hasOwnProperty(newKey)' to avoid issues that may arise if the object has a property with the name 'hasOwnProperty'. This is a more robust way to check for property existence.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is well implemented with proper checks for property presence and returns the correct values. However, there are a couple of improvements that can be made to enhance the code quality.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The variable name 'clone' could be more descriptive. Consider renaming it to 'invertedRobot' or something similar to reflect its purpose of storing the inverted key-value pairs of the 'robot' object.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The method 'hasOwnProperty' is a safe way to check for property existence, but it's recommended to use 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(clone, newKey)' to avoid issues in cases where the object might have a property with the name 'hasOwnProperty'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The function 'inverseRobot' is well implemented with proper checks for property presence and returns the correct values as per the task requirements. However, there are a few suggestions to improve the code quality.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

The variable name 'clone' could be more descriptive. Consider renaming it to 'invertedRobot' to better reflect its purpose as the inverse of the input 'robot'.

[mateacademy-ai-mentor]

Instead of using 'hasOwnProperty', it's recommended to use 'Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call' to avoid issues if the 'clone' object has a property with the name 'hasOwnProperty'.