Retired
Verify three kinds (), [], <> of nested parentheses (retired)
Loading description...
Fundamentals
Algorithms
Logic
Validation
Strings
Data Types
View
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.
No sample tests.
The fixed tests are too weak. You can successfully return
1
as long as you don't encounter wrong closing parenthesis/bracket.No random tests.
Duplicate: https://www.codewars.com/kata/valid-braces
It similar, but:
<>
It's too similar:
<>
don't make enough difference. I solved both with almost the same code.false
with0
andtrue
with1
is trivial (btw. in PythonFalse == 0
andTrue == 1
so in a Python translation this wouldn't make any difference).If you argue against kata being a duplicate try to have valid points :)
Regards,
suic