Make if2 less confusing

Some people would get stuck on this exercise, trying to understand the meaning
behind foo, fuzz, baz etc. Making the theme of the code make a little more sense
to humans should hopefully prevent people from getting confused by abstract and
non-sensical tests.

1 files changed, 12 insertions, 10 deletions

diff --git a/exercises/03_if/if2.rs b/exercises/03_if/if2.rs
index 593a77a..10037f2 100644
--- a/exercises/03_if/if2.rs
+++ b/exercises/03_if/if2.rs
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 // TODO: Fix the compiler error on this function.
-fn foo_if_fizz(fizzish: &str) -> &str {
-    if fizzish == "fizz" {
-        "foo"
+fn picky_eater(food: &str) -> &str {
+    if food == "strawberry" {
+        "Yummy!"
     } else {
         1
     }
@@ -18,18 +18,20 @@ mod tests {
     use super::*;
 
     #[test]
-    fn foo_for_fizz() {
-        // This means that calling `foo_if_fizz` with the argument "fizz" should return "foo".
-        assert_eq!(foo_if_fizz("fizz"), "foo");
+    fn yummy_food() {
+        // This means that calling `picky_eater` with the argument "food" should return "Yummy!".
+        assert_eq!(picky_eater("strawberry"), "Yummy!");
     }
 
     #[test]
-    fn bar_for_fuzz() {
-        assert_eq!(foo_if_fizz("fuzz"), "bar");
+    fn neutral_food() {
+        assert_eq!(picky_eater("potato"), "I guess I can eat that.");
     }
 
     #[test]
-    fn default_to_baz() {
-        assert_eq!(foo_if_fizz("literally anything"), "baz");
+    fn default_disliked_food() {
+        assert_eq!(picky_eater("broccoli"), "No thanks!");
+        assert_eq!(picky_eater("gummy bears"), "No thanks!");
+        assert_eq!(picky_eater("literally anything"), "No thanks!");
     }
 }