@yanglbme Why was this merged to the development?

There is a signature for the author in the code which we decided not to have and is mentioned on README.

It has improper coding standards such as

boolean result = instance.contains(2)&&instance.contains(11);
String proof = instance.getLeft().toString()+instance.toString()+instance.getRight().toString();

Please make sure that you are reviewing the PR before merging.

I will be reverting a few PRs which were merged incorrectly on the Developement branch. We need to keep this branch as clean as possible.

Hi @varunu28 , I think there is no problem adding a signature to the code because it conforms to the Java coding specification. And you can just make some changes to improve the code.

Hi @varunu28 , I think there is no problem adding a signature to the code because it conforms to the Java coding specification. And you can just make some changes to improve the code.

The problem arises when someone modifies an existing code and adds another signature on top of the existing signature making the file more verbose.

And coming to coding standards, I am still not sure why it was overlooked and how the changes got approved.

Complete code file has uneven distribution of braces, improper spaces and hacky in-line comments spread throughout the code.

@varunu28 ╮(╯-╰)╭ All right, it's up to you now.

My Fault, I didn't review the code carefully. So sorry... @varunu28

@yanglbme I am not sure about what idea did you got from this conversation but my only intention is that we have clean and tested code in the repository.

Members of the repo have already opened issues about code being buggy. The code in binary search on master was also pointed to me by a user through email.

My only request is to have the code tested on your local before approving the changes. We plan to build a test pipeline for having automated cases in future but till then we have to be extra careful about the quality of code we are adding to the repo.

@varunu28 OK, I got it.