Aiplorer Code Practice Pack | Version 1 | Comparison worksheet
Fictional exercise. Blank local record, not saved browser data or a benchmark.
Keep completed records and code in an approved location. Do not include secrets.

STARTING POINT
Original files: reminder-days-v1.mjs and reminder-days-v1.test.mjs.
Expected first result: assertion failure for zero (actual 7, expected 0).
Original reproduction result and output location:
Question for this comparison:

RUN A
Date and timezone:
Tool / visible settings (write "not shown" if unknown):
Exact request and original input file location:
Proposed diff location:
Did the candidate alter tests, add dependencies or change the input contract?
Command: node reminder-days-v1.test.mjs
Actual exit status and first output location:
Outcome: meets these checks / needs correction / could not test
If failed, which assertion stopped the run? Later assertions are not verified.
Manual diff review and remaining concerns:
Repair request and separate corrected result, if any:

RUN B
Start from a separate copy of the unchanged original buggy file.
Date and timezone:
Tool / visible settings (write "not shown" if unknown):
What changed since A? What could not be held constant?
Exact request and original input file location:
Proposed diff location:
Did the candidate alter tests, add dependencies or change the input contract?
Command: node reminder-days-v1.test.mjs
Actual exit status and first output location:
Outcome: meets these checks / needs correction / could not test
If failed, which assertion stopped the run? Later assertions are not verified.
Manual diff review and remaining concerns:
Repair request and separate corrected result, if any:

DECISION AND NEXT VISIT
What changed in the observed behavior or diff?
What does this five-check sample NOT establish?
Next relevant test or review question:
Non-sensitive reminder for My Shortlist:

A passing run is not production approval or proof of security. Do not rank
tools from this sample. If the input contract or tests changed, record a new
experiment rather than claiming a like-for-like improvement.