Skip to main content

Section 1.1 Parsons Left-Numbering Overflow Tests I

This page contains test cases for verifying that numbered="left" on Parsons blocks does not cause the source area to overflow its container. Each exercise targets a different combination of options that could interact with the left-label width calculation.

Subsection 1.1.1 Group 1: Baseline (original bug-report cases)

Activity 1.1.1.

Case 1-A: Short lines, adaptive, indentation hidden, left-numbered. This mirrors the first example from the original bug report.

Activity 1.1.2.

Case 1-B: Paired distractors, adaptive, indentation hidden, left-numbered. Mirrors the second example from the original bug report.

Subsection 1.1.2 Group 2: Non-adaptive (static) exercises

Activity 1.1.3.

Case 2-A: Static (non-adaptive), indentation hidden, left-numbered. Verifies that the fix works without the adaptive scaffolding path.

Activity 1.1.4.

Case 2-B: Static, indentation enabled, left-numbered. Tests that the label width interacts correctly with indent columns.

Subsection 1.1.3 Group 3: Long lines

Activity 1.1.5.

Case 3-A: Long code lines, adaptive, left-numbered. The wider blocks mean the label column competes for the most space.

Activity 1.1.6.

Case 3-B: Very long lines, static, left-numbered. Tests the worst-case for horizontal overflow.

Subsection 1.1.4 Group 4: Ten or more blocks (double-digit line numbers)

Activity 1.1.7.

Case 4-A: Ten blocks, adaptive, left-numbered. At 10+ blocks the label gets an extra space for alignment; verify this extra padding does not cause overflow.

Activity 1.1.8.

Case 4-B: Twelve blocks, adaptive, indentation enabled, left-numbered. Combines the double-digit label path with indent columns.

Subsection 1.1.5 Group 5: Different languages

Activity 1.1.9.

Case 5-A: Java, adaptive, indentation hidden, left-numbered.

Activity 1.1.10.

Case 5-B: Natural language, adaptive, left-numbered. Natural language steps can be long prose; tests that the label column does not push prose lines out of the source area.

Subsection 1.1.6 Group 6: Right-numbered (control comparison)

Activity 1.1.11.

Case 6-A: Right-numbered, adaptive, no indent. Numbers on the right should be unaffected by the left-label fix; use this as a visual baseline to confirm right-numbering still works.

Activity 1.1.12.

Case 6-B: Right-numbered, paired distractors, adaptive. Paired bins with right labels should look identical to pre-fix behavior.

Subsection 1.1.7 Group 7: Multiple indent levels with left numbering

Activity 1.1.13.

Case 7-A: Three levels of indentation, adaptive, left-numbered. Deep indentation reduces the effective code width; the label column must still fit without causing the outer container to overflow.

Activity 1.1.14.

Case 7-B: Mixed indentation, long lines, static (non-adaptive), left-numbered. Combines the widest lines with indent columns to stress-test the layout.

Subsection 1.1.8 Group 8: No numbering (control — confirms fix is non-breaking)

Activity 1.1.15.

Case 8-A: No line numbers at all, adaptive, no indent. Confirms the fix does not accidentally break the default (unnumbered) layout.

Activity 1.1.16.

Case 8-B: No line numbers, static, indentation enabled. A second unnumbered control case with indentation.