6 kyu
Generate All Possible Matches
125eladkap
Loading description...
Recursion
Fundamentals
.avif)
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.
Very good kata! Satisfaction rating should be higher!!
Duplicate to all find-all paths from roots to leaves.
B4B is just going to come in and resolve this issue, like the one you raised a minute ago. What's the point?
despite being a ""duplicate"", it's valuable for codewars.
That won't change anything.
Duplicate to all find-all paths from roots to leaves.
Yeah, 1 + 1 = 2 is always good for humanity, after all here's how everyone starts to learn.
I'll keep out of this (it's between you two), but I can't help but point out the irony of you posting duplicate issues complaining about duplicate katas :)
Duplicate issues are always relatively better than duplicate katas, at best this can be retired, but too much effort for me for no gain. :D
Maybe. But we already have one user going around marking issues "xyz is not novel/interesting/etc.". One is enough, no? :)
(that makes them a duplicate of each others, no?)
That's entirely out-of-the-topic, what that has to do with anything going on here? Should I check whether there are users who raise issues about particular things before raising new issues?
No, indeed, you shouldn't need to check. I'm saying that in this particular case, no check is needed; this issue will magically be raised all by itself. You just have to sit back and wait :) And that's the last sarcastic remark I'll make about that, not here to make enemies.
I can mention here a lot of "duplicate" problems in CodeWars. What do you identify as a "duplicate problem"? It is duplicate because the solution is quite the same for another problem. But the story of the problem is different, and it's the developer/user job to identify the kind of problem and solve it accordingly.
This comment has been hidden.
thing is... if you don't say it out loud, some users (eg. target audience) won't even know how to implement that.
(I already put a spoiler flag on your message)
Sorry, my bad. But it does validate XRFXLP's point about being a duplicate. I.e. it wasn't before the description change, but it is now.
he knows the rules. Link? Then it's possibly arguable (would be left to decide which one is to retire)
Duplicate to all find-all paths from roots to leaves.
(Honestly, this is duplicate of atleast 100 katas)
It kinda wasn't until the author updated the description to reveal the entire process to figuring out the solution.
.
Yes, it should be best if the user is left to figure out the relation on his own. Excellent way to hide duplicates. XD
There are only so many graph problems, so duplicates are unavoidable, and that is fine. A problem has two parts to it: 1) figure out how to solve the problem 2) implement your solution as efficient code. In 8-6 kyu katas, the 1) part is usually given. In higher level katas you have to figure that part out, which is part of the fun! That's why I don't mind writing my upteenth variation on a DFS if it wasn't entirely obvious that a DFS was needed or even apropriate. This was such a case, where I had to think for a minute before realisation struck me (and that is always satisfying, never gets old).
That feeling is entirely subjective, any begineer can easily say for sorting algorithms, Should we keep 100 sorting katas?
The order of match flows is clarified in description.
This comment has been hidden.
You right - this is up-to k matches and NOT best-of-k. I updated the description and fixed the first sample test (no argument)
Thanks
iterationsshould beincrements. Secondly, you should specify what the expected order is. I can pay attention to the order of my outputs until the cows come home, I still wouldn't know whether it is right or wrong unless I test it.thing is, wouldn't it be too much to spell that out? (instead of just saying to the user to pay extra attention to the order of the output)
If it is part of the challenge to figure it out, maybe. But it's not. The challenge is implementing the algorithm. Perhaps I'm being nitpicky, but this is a pet peeve of mine: descriptions that basically say "go run some tests/analyze this example to know what the hell you're supposed to be doing". As an author, it's your job to write a clear, encompassing specification, and it is my job to adhere to that specification and provide an accurate solution. Everything else is a puzzle. If you can't put into words the result you're expecting, then a) how can you expect a user to solve it and b) maybe you're not yet ready to author this kata :)
(I believe there's even mention of this somewhere in the kata authoring docs).
Well, to me, that's what the challenge was. Once that is told, there is not much left to think about.
Yeah, this falls into some gray area about what is or isn't a kata, I guess...
well, with that spelled out, I guess it will make a good 6 kyu to introduce users to this kind of algorithms.
Haha, I rated this 5kyu, thinking about your hammer...
Edit: Oh wow, just looked at the new description. Now the entire challenge is indeed given away (identifying that this is a tree and has to be implemented as such)
What is
k? In Example 2 the maximum score is calledk, but the description says "best of k (k is a parameter)" and the function argument is calledbest_of_k.Apart from that, description is quite hard to read and assumes a lot from reader:
match-flows?What is score steps?
Please explain how this output has been concluded: `[['0:0', '1:0'], ['0:0', '0:1']]
`
Hi guys, I will clarify that more in the description. Score step is 1 means every scoring increases by 1 (like in soccer, ping-pong) not in basketball where there is 2pt and 3pt shots.
"Best of k" is actually a mistake. I meant the first to score k points wins
.
hi,
the ordering of the output isn't sepcified (or rather, just say that the output needs to be generated in the shown order)
cheers
.