Retired
t5 (retired)
Loading description...
Games
Simulation
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.
The premise of this kata is essentially to model a random event exactly as the reference solution does, which is clearly very flawed. A solution which has a perfectly valid model of the game described can be rejected purely because its solution uses
random
in a slightly different way to the author, or even because it uses some other source of randomness.A simple example of a solution which models the game accurately but is rejected:
I added the restriction that both players must independently and randomly select a suitcase each round. Additionally, we now use our own custom random generator for all random selections, and I've limited the randomization to this model specifically—avoiding other sources like np.random, etc., to ensure consistency.
Tests should import
random
explicitly, rather than relying on the user's solution to do thatThanks. Good suggestion! I removed it from the initial solution and put it into the tests.
I don't think the description should state that you need a recursive function.
Some of the solutions don't use a recursive function, that's only one way of solving the kata
You're totally right. Thanks for pointing this out. I modified the description following your suggestion.
This comment has been hidden.
still though, on the surface, very interesting kata it seems!
Thank you, rowcased! I fixed this issue.
Resolved