Kata

What should I do?

Put it back.

And not remove it again please. ( Not accidentally either, by approving a translation that doesn't have it. )

It seems like my OCaml translation changed the description, even though I didn't touch it ...

Anyway it's back.

No, OP forked and approved another translation and broke it. Your translation probably reinstated it.

I did it manually

Oh! Thanks!

@Glinator Thank you for the OCaml translation.

You're welcome ! I have done other translations to OCaml, they are in my collections.

Other opinion ( and no more than that ): I like the current description, and have no problem understanding it.

But I am not the measure of all people.

I am not sure about this. The description, although I am not 100% sure about grammar, was quite clear for me.

"With a and b alternating" doesn't seem unidiomatic in English: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22with+a+and+b+alternating%22&client=firefox-b-e&biw=1916&bih=919&tbm=bks&ei=gHqnYtnxNNK7lwTr1rawAg&ved=0ahUKEwjZsYOogKv4AhXS3YUKHWurDSYQ4dUDCAg&uact=5&oq=%22with+a+and+b+alternating%22&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEANQ_glY_glgsAxoAHAAeACAAT2IAXKSAQEymAEAoAEBwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz-books

I like the current description, and have no problem understanding it.

Sorry, but I wouldn't consider you as a reference, when it comes to descriptions... ':) ;)

I wouldn't consider you as a reference, when it comes to descriptions... '

I wouldn't consider you as a reference, when it comes to detecting Frenglish ;) (I am not either...)

I think if no native speaker complains about the description, this issue should be forgotten. (the problem of the function name in JS remains)

I think the description currently is well defined and very understandable.

Just changed my vote from 8 to 7...

I pasted a link, so everyone can check the breakdown.

I would advise whoever approves, to also modify the description to make it language agnostic.

link

we're currently at 8 * 20, 7 * 13 ( disregarding the single 6 ). now all we need is the ability to approve at 7.6.

8 * 23, 7 * 15 now. stable at 7.6. :O

{"data":[{"rank":-8,"count":26}
        ,{"rank":-7,"count":31}
        ,{"rank":-6,"count":1}
        ]}

With a definite trend towards 7, I approved at that. Depending on language, it may be an 8 - enjoy the cheap points and the good language. :D

Does this fix the issue?: https://www.codewars.com/kumite/62a6789ca4f39b00681b6b41?sel=62a713c4c82d0f003e6c6f00

It should, but I think it should be NonNegative.

Changed.

Haskell random tests generate negative lengths.

Sorry. I forgot about that.

Most ( all? ) of those seem to focus on enumerating a range, possibly with a step.

Generating a list of a certain length is definitely a duplicate, but filling said list with a cycle instead of an enumeration is different ( or possibly I missed something in that list ).

I don't know where to draw the line. I just liked the kata.

I agree with Johan. Easy similar tasks with some degree of variation are acceptable and are good exercises for beginners, and I can't see a real duplicate in the link you have given. See jhoffner's message there: https://www.codewars.com/kata/62453a1085c36c0017f42265/discuss/python

The author came back to the original description with JS blocks when he approved Rust translation...

I suggest 'Alternating Values in an Array'.

You know, this is my first time so a little fixes are needed. But thanks for support.

fine