Add wordy

[keiravillekode]

No description provided.

[kotp]

Approved with one suggestion to remove one extraneous EOL.

[kotp]

Suggested change

	(provide 'wordy)
	;;; wordy.el ends here
	(provide 'wordy)
	;;; wordy.el ends here

[fapdash]

There's an argument to be had about having a named error here. For a difficulty 6 exercise I think it's fine to expect an explicit error "type".

eg.

(signal 'syntax-error)

and

(should-error (answer "What is 1 2 plus?") :type 'syntax-error)

https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Signaling-Errors.html#index-signal

https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/ert/The-should-Macro.html

@keiravillekode Wdyt?

[fapdash]

For reference, there's been a of discussion about the errors in this exercise in particular and a larger discussion about the usefulness of input validation.

[keiravillekode]

For this specific exercise, I have experienced the described frustration.

When I ported this exercise to various tracks - arm64-assembly futhark sml vlang - I haven't distinguished between the error cases.

Perhaps we could use a single named error like 'parse-error

[fapdash]

@keiravillekode I'll defer to your judgment, but using just one error type seems reasonable and is more friendly to the students. :)

Could you please add a comment to the test file that the track is diverging from the canonical test data on purpose and explain the reasoning? It's more visible than in a commit message and will help people later on with maintaining. :)

[keiravillekode]

Could you please add a comment

Comment added