[freelancer-rates] Tidy up instructions, syncing wording across cpp, elixir and x86-64-assembly

[IsaacG]

cpp, elixir and x86-64-assembly all have a pretty similar intro doc for this exercise. This PR tidies up some of the differences between them (merging in improvements) and brings swift onboard with them.

Related:

• https://forum.exercism.org/t/grammatical-mistake-in-freelancer-rates-exercise/88606/5
• [freelancer-rates] Tidy up instructions, syncing wording across cpp, elixir and x86-64-assembly cpp#1042
• [freelancer-rates] Tidy up instructions, syncing wording across cpp, elixir and x86-64-assembly #1654
• [freelancer-rates] Tidy up instructions, syncing wording from cpp, elixir and x86-64-assembly swift#952

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to exercism/elixir 💜 🎉. This is an automated PR comment 🤖 for the maintainers of this repository that helps with the PR review process. You can safely ignore it and wait for a maintainer to review your changes.

Based on the files changed in this PR, it would be good to pay attention to the following details when reviewing the PR:

• General steps

  • 🏆 Does this PR need to receive a label with a reputation modifier (x:size/{tiny,small,medium,large,massive})? (A medium reputation amount is awarded by default, see docs)

• Any exercise changed

  • 👤 Does the author of the PR need to be added as an author or contributor in <exercise>/.meta/config.json (see docs)?
  • 🔬 Do the analyzer and the analyzer comments exist for this exercise? Do they need to be changed?
  • 📜 Does the design file (<exercise>/.meta/design.md) need to be updated to document new implementation decisions?

• Concept exercise changed

  • 🌲 Do prerequisites and practices in config.json need to be updated?
  • 📖 Does the concept introduction provide all necessary information to solve this exercise?

---

Automated comment created by PR Commenter 🤖.

[angelikatyborska]

Thanks for the changes. They look good. Looks like there's improved grammar in here 👍 but technically speaking, we don't really need to be learning exercises consistent between tracks, right? When we first wrote them, that was the whole point - each track can write whatever they want and there's no problem specs.

Btw. I didn't look into the i18n things yet, but will that check "i18n completeness" keep failing for all PRs? It looks like it wants us to translate something to many different languages. But I'm not expected to translate to Hungarian and Chinese every time I change something in this repo, am I?

[IsaacG]

technically speaking, we don't really need to be learning exercises consistent between tracks, right

Absolutely! And these PRs do not make the docs completely consistent. They all each have track specific bits (double vs Double vs float and much more)! However, the prose bits have been improved over time on the various tracks. It reduces maintainer effort and improves doc quality if we do sync improvements across tracks. It's not necessary, but I believe it's strictly better. By keeping the docs consistent-ish, future doc improvements are easier to cross apply, amplifying the impact of changes with reduces efforts.

Do we need to do this? Not at all. Does this improve Exercism? I strongly believe it does!

Btw. I didn't look into the i18n things yet, but will that check "i18n completeness" keep failing for all PRs?

The translations are done via AI. No human work needed. Details here: exercism/problem-specifications#2686

TL;DR: once the PR is approved and ready to ship (no future changes to avoid re-translating), add a PR label ready-to-translate. GitHub CI/CD handles the rest. Wait ~5-10 minutes and translations should be done and the CI check should be green.

[exercism-i18n]

This PR has been translated 🚀

[angelikatyborska]

No failures. Cost: $0.0314.

That's impressively low costs 🤔

[angelikatyborska]

Thanks a pretty neat translation process. Thanks for helping out 🌷

[IsaacG]

No failures. Cost: $0.0314.

That's impressively low costs 🤔

Apparently DeepSeek is far cheaper than US alternatives.