Please notice that in your first message you never said anything about the variable names at all. That was not the issue for you. Actually the issue for you, and I quote, was:
You need to correct: The code checking mechanism. It is checking for index 3 and not for index 4.
And yes, it was cheking for the index number 3, which represents the FOURTH element mentioned in the instruction. It is correct.
And now the varaible names is all you talk about in your second message.
What a I tried to do with these names was to point out that they were two different variables. But the point here is that the instruction does not rely on the variable names whatsoever. So, you do not have to notice the difference to answer the question.You only need to follow the instruction:
Assign the fourth element from the list
row_1 to a variable named
ratings_1 . Don’t forget that the indexing starts at
This instruction is as clear as it could be. Note that it does not tell you to assign the “count of ratings” or anything like that. It explicitly tells you to assign the FOURTH element. And it reminds you that the indexing starts at 0.
Also, if you click in the
Get a hint button you’ll get this:
- The indexing starts at
0 , so the third element in a list corresponds to index number
And if you click to see the answer, you will see this:
ratings_1 = row_1
I mean, it is all over you! There’s no confusion at all.
And do not get me wrong here, I have no problem with the fact that you did not understand the concepts or the instructions or anything. There’s no such thing as a stupid question. If you do no get it, you are more than correct to ask. Everybody goes through this. I still do.
The problem for me, however, is that you did not ask. You just communicated that the plataform was wrong. And it is not. You were too busy assuming that you were correct that you did not notice that you weren’t.
Since you mentioned the beauty of teaching, I’d say that the beauty of learning is to admit that you do not know and try do get better. When you classify as “Correct Understanding” a clearly wrong understanding despite the fact that the actual correct understanding is all over you, you do not seem to admit that you are the one who do not know, not Dataquest. I mean, you are literally looking at the answer and saying it is wrong. Well, it is not.
And you even said that when you executed ratings_1 = row_1 , it was accepted. Well, of course it was.