5 kyu
Additionless addition.
1,381dukerutledge
Loading description...
Fundamentals
This comment has been reported as {{ abuseKindText }}.
Show
This comment has been hidden. You can view it now .
This comment can not be viewed.
- |
- Reply
- Edit
- View Solution
- Expand 1 Reply Expand {{ comments?.length }} replies
- Collapse
- Spoiler
- Remove
- Remove comment & replies
- Report
{{ fetchSolutionsError }}
-
-
Your rendered github-flavored markdown will appear here.
-
Label this discussion...
-
No Label
Keep the comment unlabeled if none of the below applies.
-
Issue
Use the issue label when reporting problems with the kata.
Be sure to explain the problem clearly and include the steps to reproduce. -
Suggestion
Use the suggestion label if you have feedback on how this kata can be improved.
-
Question
Use the question label if you have questions and/or need help solving the kata.
Don't forget to mention the language you're using, and mark as having spoiler if you include your solution.
-
No Label
- Cancel
Commenting is not allowed on this discussion
You cannot view this solution
There is no solution to show
Please sign in or sign up to leave a comment.
JS Node 14. should be enabled
I've posted the Python translation of this kata 8 months ago. Could it plz be checked and approved/rejected?
It's no use to post duplicate suggestions. Old suggestions don't disappear and are easy to find out.
This comment has been hidden.
This is not a kata issue.
This comment has been hidden.
Your code is not properly formatted so it's not easy to see, but you are creating an array (
concatis an array prototype). Please have a look at the documentation (see left panel).That
concatis a String methodFantastic challenge!
Python translation kumited. Please check and approve, thank you!
Python Translation
Rejected as kata cannot be translated into Python without at a minimum the full module blocker (which should only be used for fixing very old translations that cannot currently be removed).
Actually I'm not even sure that you could prevent all possible ways of cheating without needing to completely break how Python works.
How did you define "usercode" in your tests to check the solution for the symbols and function?
In
Preloaded. Fork a solution and you can see it.new Arrayis not the[or]operator. The description should be clarified.Edit: Also apparently the description says
;can't be used but clearly solutions are using it?That was a mistake, should be
'.I just added a check to
Arrayas well, but then, since I've banned.it should be impossible to do anything with an array anyway.Approved
I also significantly ramped up the anti-cheat tests. All unintended solutions have been invalidated as far as I can see, so I think it's good to go ;-)
The anti-cheat test rejected my comment below, claiming it looked like I was doing something with an array / object
// http://bfy.tw/Emr6Edit: Oops - didn't notice the
.Just my opinion:
The new and improved anti-cheat tests have killed all the different, creative solutions.
What you have done may actually very well be in the spirit of the kata as originally intended by its author, but, as you might know, I always enjoy seeing different solutions.
I do not consider this an improvement. :/
Prohibiting
"."is pretty clever BTW. :]Using other ways would make this kata at most a high
7kyu, so I had to kill them ;-)This comment has been hidden.
The ++ operator is not the + operator.
The description should be clarified.
Just ran into this myself. Really stumped on how to solve this without a few increment loops!
Clarified
I tried a solution with the incriment ++ operator (and no addition + operator) but it was rejected for using a +. So, apparently ++ isn't allowed either.
Same here, would be helpful to have it explicitly stated in the directions just to save some time
nice kata
Oh my god, this is my favorite kata ever!
Test (not submit) should reflect requirement for no "+" or "-".
Clarified
Some hint as to how to solve the problem should be included.
Nope.
haha! I'm super beginner and have to say... I'm absolutely clueless here, apart from using loops but these are forbidden here.
This comment has been hidden.
Not enough tags. Maybe little more of description.
Not an issue ;-)
What's great about this kata is the wide variety of solutions that it inspires. Bravo.
I think, kata should discourage solutions involving linear time like O(x+y)
You need to know math at a high level. Noy for 8 kyu!
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
This comment has been hidden.
Added
This comment has been hidden.
I think
evalshould be disabled, as I'm sure that defeats the purpose of this kata.evalandnew Functionhave been disabled.I cant complete the kata now. No matter what I do I get the error "Unexpected end of input". The code works just fine with my own test fixture.
It worked for me, using a past solution. Maybe it's a CodeWars issue?
@constablebrew could you paste in your erroring solution?
This comment has been hidden.
Your solution should work now.
Disabled
This comment has been hidden.
You are a sneaky individual. I'll think about some revisions.
I agree. Quite easy to work around this one. You could always re-compile the function from the code and use that to test, if you like? This would exclude any use of external variables or workarounds.
This comment has been hidden.
Yes I wasn't necessarily trying to force people to do bitwise calculations. I assumed the array concat solution would show up at some point. I just wanted to avoid the case where you were calling a seperate function. In fact your other solutions are rather clever and I'm not sure I'd want to discourage them either.
Okay,
evalandnew Functionnow throw errors. This should get rid of the "lazy" cheating cases, but still leave room for other solutions and creative cheating.Cool. I'd update the description to note that those options are disabled, something like this:
Also, you still need to correct your test cases. This:
should be
The tested (actual) value comes first, while the expected value is second.
You also need to replace the
\tbefore//returnwithFix those three issues, and I'll mark this kata as ready.
Good enough. :-P