you really love classes, ¿don' you?

The description does as bad a job at explaining what is to be done as the other kata. Actually, worse - there are lots of requirements that are not even mentioned ( and there are no example tests about them either. I consider that dishonest. there should be no surprises in the submit tests ).

Also, I always feel dirty after dissecting function source to extract argument names, even dirtier than I would feel using with to pass definitions to a scope ( which seems the less bad way to do this kind of thing in JS ).

Is this pattern really suitable to JS? Shouldn't it use with instead of doing unnatural things to functions?

Looks cool, but hardcode.

Hi, @richkotze!

Thanks for a nice kata.

But, what if typeof childten isn't a string?

  it('should not shorten text unless typeof children is string', () => {
    const result = shallow(<ShortParagraph><b>{text}</b></ShortParagraph>);
    expect(result.children().text()).toEqual(text);
  });

CoffeeScript translation kumited

please scrutinize for approval.

Can you approve my CoffeeScript translation ?