Review Summary

I am requesting changes because a core requirement of the task is not yet met: you implemented [].__proto__.sort2 in src/arrayMethodSort.js, but you never wire it up so that Array.prototype.sort actually uses this implementation. As a result, calls like arr.sort() will still use the built‑in sort, which means the custom behavior the task asks you to implement is not in effect. To fix this, after defining sort2 (e.g., near the bottom of the file), explicitly assign it to the standard method, for example: Array.prototype.sort = Array.prototype.sort2;.

There is also a smaller but still important correctness issue: const comparator = compareFunction || defaultComparator; treats any falsy value (including null or 0) as if no comparator was provided, which diverges from the intended behavior; instead, check that compareFunction is actually a function, e.g. const comparator = typeof compareFunction === 'function' ? compareFunction : defaultComparator; or throw a TypeError for non-callables if required by the spec. Your bubble sort implementation and default string comparator logic look good and satisfy the algorithmic part of the task. Once you wire sort2 to Array.prototype.sort and tighten the comparator handling, your solution should meet the task requirements well. Keep up the solid work—these are straightforward but important final adjustments.

✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center¹. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨

Review Summary

I am requesting changes because there is still a correctness issue with how the compareFunction argument is handled in src/arrayMethodSort.js, which affects compliance with Array.prototype.sort behavior. Currently, the code uses if (compareFunction) to decide whether to use a custom comparator; this treats any falsy non-function (e.g. null, 0) as if no comparator was supplied, instead of either using a valid function or throwing a TypeError. You should change this logic so that:

• If compareFunction === undefined, you fall back to the default string-based comparator, and
• If compareFunction !== undefined and typeof compareFunction !== 'function', you throw new TypeError('compareFunction must be a function'), and
• Only when typeof compareFunction === 'function' do you call it as the comparator.
  This change is required because passing invalid comparators currently yields incorrect behavior instead of an error, which breaks functional expectations of the sort API. As a minor note (not blocking): your bubble sort implementation is fine for this exercise, but you may want to add a short comment that it is O(n²) and that more efficient algorithms (like quicksort or mergesort) would be preferable for large arrays. Overall, your wiring of sort2 to Array.prototype.sort and your default string comparison are good; once the comparator validation is corrected, the solution will meet the task’s core requirements.

✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center¹. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨

Review Summary

I am approving your solution as an educational override so you can keep progressing while you learn, even though there are a couple of small issues to fix.

You did a solid job implementing a custom Array.prototype.sort, wiring it through [].__proto__.sort2 and then assigning it to sort, and using a bubble-sort loop that correctly returns the array. One important detail to fix is the error message: when a non-function comparator (that is not undefined) is passed, the requirement is to throw TypeError('compareFunction must be a function'), but your code currently throws a different message; updating the string exactly will ensure tests that check the message pass. Also, instead of if (compareFunction) before calling the comparator, prefer if (typeof compareFunction === 'function') so that only actual functions are treated as comparators and to avoid any confusion with falsy values like 0 or ''. As a minor improvement, you could add a short comment that this implementation uses bubble sort and is O(n²), just to document its performance characteristics for large arrays.

Overall, your structure and understanding of custom sorting are good—these tweaks will help you align more closely with the specification and make your code clearer and more robust.

✨ Please rate this review in the Platform's notification center¹. I will be grateful for your feedback! ✨