21 Day Coding Challenge

Challenge 20 - Beware


I don’t want to go into how I solved it (don’t want to spoil anything), and I’m not sure if this is necessary to get the challenge solved, but I incorporated this into my function to complete the challenge.


res is just the array name I used for the .split function so ignore that. Just know that regarding the “w021d” in the message from the challenge, that 1 should be an l (and not an i). In case you’re having issues with when you return your message, try hardcoding in ’ array[73] = “l” ’

Best of luck!

EDIT: Apparently it’s not necessary to add extra coding for the “would” typo. I just made this thread as a precautionary thing. But if you did add this fix, your answer will be correct anyways (so do not fret). Still wish you all the best of luck! :slight_smile:


Just a note on why 73.
73 is the character space in the message where you would find the 1 in “w021d” if you were to split the characters within the message into substrings. :slight_smile:

1 Like

I did not hard code it but my answer got accepted. Did i do something wrong?


Thank you for that info. I was super confused about the 73! :blush:


I think they just made a typo :wink: they’ve replaced a L with an 1, which would be ok, L33t Sp3@k wise, but in this case, it’s a risk of confusion, since it’s only supposed to be vowels that are affected…


I think the mistake in the word “would” is a reflection of the generally poor QA of these challenges.


I kind of agree with you, to some level, but I also doubt I could do any better by myself. When thousands of people are looking at what you did, they’re bound to find mistakes that a handful of people won’t necessarily see. That being said, they would most likely benefit from running the Challenges by a more diverse test group before launching the event.


Choosing a school that teaches coding, I expect a pretty high level of quality before I sign up. I don’t believe the ambiguous instructions and typos are a reflection of Lighthouse Labs as a school, but I do hope they review all of the issues that arose in this competition before their next one.

If Lighthouse Labs reads this - I’m offering my QA services for free!


As a future student, I couldn’t agree more with you and from what I saw so far in their overall material, the quality is great, but fixing typos isn’t part of their priority list. That being said, they’re quite involved with different coding communities and organize multiple coding events. Time is limited for everyone. I can understand that it might be low on their priority list, although it has high visibility. :wink: I personally haven’t decided if I want to hold that against them, but I’m not willing to judge their overall approach based on those typos either. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: And apart from that and some ambiguous Challenge descriptions, I’ve only heard positive things from them. :sunny:

I’d also add that as students, what we learn in a teaching environment should only be a very small part of what we bring to the table, it’s especially true in web development, where the field is changing so fast that what we learn today will most likely be replaced in just a few years, if not months, with new approaches and ways of doing things.

Sufing the wave of technology change… Weeeehhhh!!! :surfing_man:


As a recently graduated student I assure you it doesn’t reflect on their teaching and you definitely shouldn’t hold it against them.


Thank you Erin for your take on it, I really appreciate it. :slight_smile:

Truth be told, I’ve been in touch with a few of their mentors and they all seem talented and professionals, with a keen interest in sharing what they know, so I can only be happy. :upside_down_face:

1 Like

“ambiguous instructions”, that’s fine. It adds a layer of realism (clients can be ambiguous with their requests).

I know that this is not a popular opinion but I think it’s valuable to balance the opinion landscape with a bit of positivity. This 21 day challenge is being provided to us at no cost, and I think they have done an outstanding job overall.


I see that Lighthouse Labs has a pretty good reputation and keep in mind that I did write, “I don’t believe the ambiguous instructions and typos are a reflection of Lighthouse Labs as a school”.

Comparing contest instructions to the “realism” of client requests is like comparing apples and mushrooms.
Think about the difference between learning how to code and realizing client requests in code.

But in terms of cost - are you suggesting that because it’s provided at no cost, we should accept lower standards?


Well, from my point of view, it’s just important to remind ourselves that like with everyone else, Lighthouse Labs are also learning from these challenges. :four_leaf_clover: Mistakes were made, but they don’t matter so much, as long as they learn from them. Would it have been better if the quality was even higher? Sure… Was it good enough to be released? Without a doubt. :slight_smile: I’m sure the next 21-day Challenge will be even better. :wink:

I don’t mean to take away anything from your initial concern. :upside_down_face:


You make some good points. My view differs in that I feel that Lighthouse Labs should be learning from their own QA/verifiction processes, not us – (unless, of course, they explicitly stated that in the introduction and I missed it).

My intention here is to motivate thinking toward GOOD QUALITY, and not making excuses for mediocrity. Quality is demanded by customers and users, so why should we as coders accept less from our teachers?

I apolgise if this is becoming a flame-war - that too is not my intention. :slight_smile:


I don’t think you made a mistake, I just made this topic thread just in case people had issues with solving it.
I’m not sure how they determine if you solved the challenge or not, but I presumed they tested your output with an expected output. I.e. you would have “wouid” instead of “would”, then MAYBE you’d get a “not getting the expected result” error. If this were the case, then hardcoding a fix like that WOULD (heh) fix this possible issue.

1 Like

Same happened to me but when they test their string against yours, the result is just fine – it’s just a typo on the challenge description and not necessarily how the verification works. Not ideal of course, and it cause some confusion. Hope they keep making these challenges and getting better at the QA over time! :slight_smile:

1 Like

I was running the message on Codepen and realized that it had converted the “1” in the message to an “L”. However I only wrote the replace command to deal with vowels, so the “L” was not a problem.

1 Like

Hey Guys :slight_smile:
Been reading a lot of feedback from this form.
First I do gotta apologize :pray: on some of the early challenges instructions. A lot of things happened between QA to rewrite, to some challenges used by others, as functions to, new modified challenges not being able to run with newer challenges, to etc.
Be assured we are taking all the feedback being posted to the form and what people email us.
We also are taking a lot of steps to avoid the problems we faced in this years 21dc to avoid in the future ones ( as we did with previous ones ).

Also please keep posting more feedback so we can keep addressing things you find that you may have better suggestions on.

As for overall question of this form I’m kind of curious of how you guys solved it where you needed to do something like res[73] (maybe after 21dc we can share some of the code that people wrote )

Once again apologizes for some of the hiccups and thank you all for all the feedback we received :slight_smile:


I ignored the suspected typo at pos 73 and my solution worked fine.

1 Like