There is no limit.

Your question is totally unrelated to this topic, go ask (or read previous posts, it's been explained before) in that kata's Discourse.

sorry for the inconvenience. i will go check it out there.

Maybe revise your code once... there may be chance that your code is failed to satisfy the testcases on Attempt!

This usually means that your solution is not correct and fails some detailed tests. Read this paragraph of FAQ for some ideas: https://docs.codewars.com/training/troubleshooting/#test-attempt

You can also ask for help on #help-solve channel of Codewars Discord.

Thank you for trying to help me. Found the solution. It was a problem with testing samples. I deleted them and was trying to create something from my own. Now everything is OK, passed the assignment

The translation is approved

Check out swift katas: For instance: https://www.codewars.com/kata/5e4d8a53b499e20016b018a0/swift

Tanks

"removed"? Do you mean "Retired" or "Draft"?

once I finish the test cases should I publish the kata?

Yeah, just make sure everything is all right, and you can read this

Yeah it was retired not removed. So once the kata is published it's on the beta right?

I created two kata, but why are they "Retired" status?

When kata has enough low satisfaction rating ( user give rate their satisfaction after solving any kata), then it gets retired.

Do I have to wait or do I have to do something?

No, you don't have to wait. BUT you need to consider the feedback given to your katas (as some of them (like naming conventions) are quite general).

You might want to read:

• https://docs.codewars.com/authoring/kata/create-first-kata/
• https://docs.codewars.com/concepts/kata/satisfaction-rating/

Your katas were retired due to auto-retirement system, which takes into consideration the satisfaction rating: https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Kata-Beta-Process

Some of the reasons for getting low satisfaction include inoriginal kata ideas, wrong reference solutions, incoherent description, etc. Typically, users write reasons in kata discource page. You may also want to look here: https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Kata-Best-Practices

Thanks

Why you think it is 2 kyu?

Here are some example of 2 kyu katas:
Three dots
Assorted Rectangular Pieces Puzzle
Optical Character Recognition

Do you really think that solutions of your kata has complexity anywhere near these?

You're changing the subject. I'm not arguing here that it should be a 2.

I am arguing two things.

1. It is absurd to suggest this is a 7 or 8, given that so few can solve it

2. The fact so many can't solve is weighing against its difficulty rating and that is a flaw in the beta process

Nope, I ain't changing the subject(just lookahead of 2-3 steps).

The fact so many can't solve is weighing against its difficulty rating and that is a flaw in the beta process

This assumes that there was a intended difficulty rating and with respect to that the deviation is stated.

BTW, I see you solved this kata in C# early on before the testing was fully tweaked to exclude N(log N) solutions. Your solution now fails the volume tests and has since shortly after the kata was posted. I'd agree this is an easy kata if I were accepting N(log N) solutions. The difficulty lies in trying to find a linear-time solution. Very few people have.

(Well, seems you're fleeting with the topic. FYI : I'd solved that after you've fixed but it failed in grouping, check again, my solution is there)

Now, coming to topic: Why your rank estimate is 2 kyu?

Err... no, why you might think this kata is easier than it is is absolutely on topic, since you're questioning my perception of the difficulty level.

However, I can see you have now just posted a new linear time solution, which wouldn't have been hard since you can see the successful solutions.

I can also see your original solution is still there, listed under "invalid solutions" and it's still N(log N) and still has a comment against it from me written last month after the tests were updated:

"This failed after updating the test cases. I am trying to set up the big test to only pass linear-time solutions."

You said: "This assumes that there was a intended difficulty rating and with respect to that the deviation is stated"

No it doesn't. It implies that averages can be skewed by outliers.

I estimated it as 2 kyu because I knew it was a difficult to find a linear-time solution to the problem, but estimated ratings are applied before they're tested, so I figured the proof would be in the pudding, but I don't think that is the case now, due to flaws I have explained.

If I produced a kata that with an actual difficulty level at a particular threshold that was still difficult enough to get high ratings, but easy enough that more people got to rate it, that kata would get a higher difficulty rating than this one.

It implies that averages can be skewed by outliers.

Average rank is pretty fine: 4 - 5 kyu. Please see the recently published 4 kyus on the site.

Just did, and I found exactly what I'd expect to find if the system was flawed in the way I suggested... a lot of variance in success rates.

KYU 4s: Find the nth Reverse Number (Extreme): 16.43% Longest Path in a Grid: 12% Create the QR-Code: 7.3% Magnet particules in boxes: 24.9% Four Color Theorem (Easy Version): 11.2% Strongly connected components: 16.5% Multiply to n: 8.62% Repetitive Sequence - Easy Version: 7.2% Solving a puzzle by matching four corners: 19.2%

I then did the same for kyu 2 and found the same: Optical character recognition: 3.17% Transforming Maze Solver: 10.4% Ludicrous Coloured Triangles: 14.9% Gerrymander Solver: 9.81% Assorted Rectangular Pieces Puzzle: 8.24% Blaine is a pain: 11.19% Flou--Play game Series #9: 17.2% Insane Coloured Triangles: 20.9% 15x15 Nonogram Solver: 13.49%

your vision of the problem is too much partial (talking about your stats). You're forgetting a lot of things:

• age of the kata
• for how long has it been out of beta?
• is the kata a "copycats attractor" or not? (for instance, something like 50% of the solutions to insane coloured triangles aren't original. Same for gerrymander and some others)
• ...

All of this is too much of a multifactorial problem to base your reasonning on those stats only.

The system IS flawed, yeah, but what you want to see here isn't what is actually there.

Some good points there and I did attempt to mitigate some of that by looking at the most recently published. But really what you're saying is there is no objective way to compare it and all we have to work with are subjective opinions of how hard something is. Unfortunately, this kata includes opinions that vary from people who believe it's a kyu1 to those who believe it's a kyu8.

I remember you looking at this kata as well and asking questions. You didn't complete it, for whatever reasons, I'm not here to judge, I've looked at lots of kata that I didn't complete. But based on what you saw, do you honestly believe an honest apraisal of this kata is kyu 7 or 8 level?

The whole essense of the difficulty of this kata is the difficulty in finding a linear-time solution. The tiny proportion of people who see that solution quickly will believe it was easy. Most people who find it difficult, will never find a linear-time solution and never vote.

It's difficult in the same sense as - How many are smaller than me II? - except that kata can be solved by applying basic knowledge of data structures that every graduate should have to beat the clock, and that's a kyu3.

Solving my kata requires the warrior to come up with a more bespoke way of detecting the patterns in linear time.

I believe you forget one thing. Your kata is obviously not white, for sure. But if people can underrank, they can overrank too. Meaning those who ranked it 1 maybe do not actaully believe it's 1 and they are just compensating for what they believe is... stupid ranking?

Other than that, yes, the estimation of the difficulty of a kata will always have to deal with opinions, unfortunately.

All in all, what I mean is: yes, I didn't complete it yet (mostly by lack of motivation to dig more), but 4 seems roughly about right to me.

Yes, I have countered the rank to get a more appropriate average. I believe this kata is kyu 2-3. I'm not sure the system can be improved by allowing people that have made several attempts to be able to vote, or to ignore outliers in votes. Perhaps a whole new array of issues might arise from it. But I would never publish such a difficult kata at 4-5.

I cannot tell about the rank, since I didn't do it. 2 kyu seems doubtful, tho. But that's an opinion out of the blue, so far...

The potential to bias the average isn’t equal in both directions.

When the average is 3 and someone changes a 2 to a 1, that has much less of an effect than dropping in an 8.

yes, and same goes the other way around (because, hey, we have... "people" ranking everything 1 kyu too... XD )

Does kata search page help?

Your code for every kata is saved in your local browser data every time you press "Test" button.

However I personally prefer working with local IDE, and I would strongly recommend using similar approach.

Thanks a million...for sharing this info and recommendation.

maybe you could make a list of n elements and one could be different--that one would be poisoned(e.g.['a','a','a'....'b']etc.)?

if youre in python

Creating a translation for a kata is definitely a good choice before creating a new kata from scratch. It will make you familiar with authoring process, reviews, and maintenance of Codewars content.

Unfortunately, there's no really good documentation on translating kata, but there is something what could be useful:

• There are Content authoring guidelines which every type of content (kata, translations) needs to fulfill to be considered of good quality. Since many of the guidelines are common for both creating a kata and creating a translation, they are not really separated and can be useful for both authors and translators. Be sure to read through all parts of the guidelines to get familiar with the ideas.
• One section of abovementioned guidelines related strictly to translations. This could be of the most interest for you, and it contains links to other, related parts.
• There is a tutorial related to authoring in C, and another article on the tricky aspects of memory management. Please read through them carefully and consider remarks collected there. I personally think that many existing C translations do not serve as good examples, because IMO they are of, umm... disputable quality. Yeah, let's call it this way ;)
• There is no general, click-through tutorial on translating a kata, and there is no tutorial for C++ nor C#. They are queued, but not yet written. But in case of any questions, you can always ask for help. You can also explicitly poke Unnamed (@error256 on Gitter, very active C and C++ reviewer) or me (@hobovsky on Gitter) and ask for a review, but I believe some other users will be eager to take a look too.

Thanks - looks a bit intimidating. I will need to a bit of research before taking this on :)

It's a common experience to feel dissatisfied when your kata spends two weeks in beta, but one can get used to that after it stays there six months more. Don't worry.

But no, seriously now: beta reviews are not very popular activity, and beta reviews of unpopular languages are even less popular activity. Easy kata in popular languages get approved quite quickly, if issues are fixed actively by the author. But some kata, even in a good shape, can sit in beta forever. Like, years. Just go to kata search list, filter by beta and sort by oldest. I have quite a few interesting kata which I'd like to out-beta, but them being created in Swift or C++ or C# does not help.

To increase a chance of the kata being approved, you can try following things:

• fix reported and incoming issues,
• translate it to more popular language. JS and Python are very good choices.
• advertise it, for example here: https://gitter.im/Codewars/codewars.com/kata-authoring-help . Just not too much :)

Haskell is kind of a peculiar exception, because Codewars has quite a number of very active and advanced Haskell (and FP/brainf**ky-math-related in general) users. That's why Haskell kata are likely to be reviewed and fixed quite quickly. I would not say the same about Rust, but what's interesting, recently two Rust users became quite active on Gitter. Posting there could help.

You might also want to take a look at this post reporting a flaw in Rust setup and report it on forum if you consider it important. The original finder has not reported it yet.

Thanks for your helpful reply. Maybe I'll try brushing up my Python, then.

is it because Rust is still something of a niche language?

For what it's worth, Rust is getting more popular on Codewars. It's currently 10th in the number of requests to test. I can see Codewars having active Rust community similar to Haskell. Rust gets more frequent language updates because it's my favorite language been painless to update in the past and few users helped when a crate had some breaking changes. I'd like to keep it relatively up-to-date as long as we can keep up with updating the kata.

I honestly don't consider the current setup of using the default test profile is flawed. However, feedback is appreciated. The issue tracker for the code runner is at https://github.com/codewars/runner.

Is the difference between Rust debug/release modes something similar to C++'s -O0/-O2? If it is, then it can be challenging to translate many kata to Rust, in particular these with performance requirements. There's a kata which used to have upper bound of a problem set at 50 with C++14 ant no optimizations, and it got increased to 1000 with C++ 17 and -O2.

But if impact on Rust is nothing similar to what C++ experienced, then I should definitely shut up and stop talking about things I have no idea about.

What I meant was that it's a trade-off like anything and not necessarily a flaw by itself.

It's obviously soooo much faster to execute with more optimization, but it also takes longer to compile and that might be significant as well (compile time is included in the time limit and it can require more resources). Haskell had some kata that required the author to adjust with pragmas, which is not possible with Rust yet.
Also, Rust is evolving fast and the compilation speed of the optimized build or the effect of the optimization are not part of the stability guarantee. This means it might make it more difficult to update kata automatically or lead to significant differences between versions. (I'm assuming dev builds will be relatively stable.)

Just to be extra clear, I'm not against the change. We just need to find the right balance after experimenting. I'm all for improving the user experience and enabling more advanced challenges. We can start by few specific examples like the kata you mentioned and experimenting with different profiles to see how it affects everything else.

I should definitely shut up and stop talking about things I have no idea about.

I obviously don't know everything about all the languages we support, so it's really helpful for users with the knowledge I lack to reach out and provide insights. Even just bringing something up to my attention can help sometimes because I can be missing something obvious. This interaction at least made me look into possible options and found [profile.dev.package."*"] that can be used to optimize the dependency independently.

I wouldn't want you or anyone to shut up, but this is not the right place to continue discussing.

Opened https://github.com/codewars/runner/issues/101

You can't fix it and it's gone

Your kata has been auto-retred because of low satisfaction rating it collected from users trying to solve it. I have not solved it so I do not know exactly what was the problem, but I believe some hints can be found in comments. Additionally, if you want to create a kata and ensure its good quality, you can read following information:

• Documentation on Content Authoring, which is still work in progress, but quality guidelines are more or less stable and conforming to them should help a kata a lot,
• Creating a kata tutorial, which is not published yet and still in progress, but might be useful. I personally don't like it though,
• Recently published tutorial for creating a kata in JS, C or Python (with other languages slowly incoming).

Can you be more precise?

In anycase, you can ask it here: https://gitter.im/Codewars/codewars.com/kata-authoring-help

hi XRFXLP,

thanks for your quick reply. I have completed correctly all parts of the kata except the testing parts.

As I don't master enough the testing framework, I ran into various errors when testing. What makes it difficult among other things is that in my reference_func, I have several functions so I'm lost with the decorators. I also do not understand well the structure of the packages (codewars_test, solution) and how I'm supposed to use these.

The kata is called Pirates and bullions treasure puzzle, can you see it?

Nope, I can't see your kata because you've not published it yet.

There's nothing fancy with decorators, just use them "above"(basically the preceeding line) the functions which you want to run.

Kinda like:

@test.it("Test suite description")
def i_want_to_run_the_code_inside_this_function():
  expected_solution = reference_solution(...)
  user_solution = solve(...)
  test.assert_equals(..., ...)

How hard it can be?

.

@xlpy You said you;ve read docs, but I am not sure which ones. Have you seen this tutorial?

I have but still can't manage to push the kata I struglle differentiating my solution func to user's func

could you pls have a look? it's published in beta

thks

Then come to the gitter channel mentioned by @XRFXLP, it should be much easier to explain there.

A kata can be deleted as long as there's no submitted solution. After at least one user completes it, it's not possible to remove it from the system anymore, neither by the author, nor by a mod.

Thanks for your answer :)

I remember someone approved katas without solving them, and it was a very bad thing to do and a lot of those were sent to beta again, because the tests were wrong or the katas being bad, duplicates, etc. So it seems possible, but not advisable. I see you authored 4 katas and they have 3 solutions each, two are already approvable. Note: the harder the kata and fewer solution it has, the harder to get it out of beta. Sometimes you have to get lucky, sometimes, you can ask in this Gitter channel: https://gitter.im/Codewars/codewars.com/kata-authoring-help

Got it. Thank you very much for the prompt reply. I read the wiki page. Looks like the new authors like me need 5 votes or more to meet the threshold. Or the purple ones are OK to go with 3 votes now?

I will try the channel.

For a purple kata authored by you to be approvable, it needs:

• have no pending issues,
• collect at least 5 votes (can be difficult for purples!),
• have >70% satisfaction rating

I am not sure right now and I will confirm with others, but I think that to approve a kata, you either need "Approve Kata" privilege (6k Honor) and have it solved, or "Edit any kata" privilege (10k Honor). It did happen that kata got approved without being solved, mostly because of griefers, and it required some work to clean it up. So, not recommended :)

Thank you sir. I appreciate you guys always respond in no time.

I just got 6K honor, and search some Kata to try my new privilege LOL. I got a target below. The author seems published less than 10 Katas, so he needs 5 vote to make the kata approvable. Now it has 4 satisfaction votes and 3 rank votes. The 5 votes refer to rank vote, or satisfaction vote? If it's the 5 rank votes required, that means even I finish the kata, it's still not approvable. Or if it's the 5 satisfaction votes required, I can try to finish it and approve it :) (BTW, this is a hard one, wish I can get it done...)

Please advise. Thanks a lot.

https://www.codewars.com/kata/58b617f15705ae68cc0000a9

I jsut confirmed and it turns out it's... not that simple :) Algorithm is somewhat complex and not trivial to explain. I can explain it to you on Gitter where it will be easier to chat, or you can wait until I put a proper explanation into docs (it's not there right now, and it may take me a while until I get it there :( ).

It's very difficult, and in many languages not really possible to be done reliably. Kata which attempt such restrictions usually end up being very poor at enforcing them. The best approach is to avoid such requirements. There is no good, reliable way to test against them.

Hello! I didn't understand your point very well, but think I have a main idea of what you are referring to. You are trying to avoid the user writing code in capitals leters? I don't get it, actually.

Yes I want to prevent the user from using capital letters for example usind: String s=""; will return an error because the word 'String' starts with a big S.

(I don't know if this is even possible)

Attempt button takes test data from "sample test" puts test data into your code and compare it with expected results. Test Data and expected results are in "Sample Test". If your code provides all results as expected results then you would see "Submitt" button. When you push it your code will go through series of tests, heavy tests which would verify lots of other random input and bad input, critical input etc. Full series must be finished within 16 seconds. If your code would be to slow you will get an error message "Time out"

best regards Michal

Errr, no. Sample tests is a section where you can write your own tests, normally a few tests are shown there by default and you can add your own if needed. Attempt has (also normally) the tests of sample tests plus more tests, some of them with input randomly generated so you can't hardcode your answers. You test your code against the tests in sample tests with Test button, and the full test suite (again, sample tests aren't tested here unless they're also written in the full test suite) with Attempt button. If you pass the full test suite, that button changes to Submit and you can submit the final version of your code.

I will have to go with @michal-szulc on this one. However I do think you have a valid point as well @Chrono79.

These tend to have the tag "puzzle"

I'd say go for it. You're unlikely to have a duplicate unless you choose some really simple "mystery" like xor.

Thanks for the reply!

If you click on the 'Preview' button in the top right corner of the editor, you will be able to test the kata, including the example test cases. Hopefully that helps

Thank you very much!

are you mutating input?

No, I belive the input remains the same throughout the code.

To try find the error, I tried changing the 7th line of the code block above to the following:

result = sort_last_char(input)

This means that all random tests should be correct no matter what, since it is comparing the user's code to itself.
But for some reason, it showed up as incorrect.

Then you need to check why calling the same function twice on identical input (you said it's not mutated by the first call, right?) returns different results.

use this: result = sort_last_char_correct(input[:]) (and I bet you actually mutate the input array, as suggested above ;p )

edit: I'm supposing your input is a 1D-array, like [0,1,3,85,1,0,...]. If it's a 2D-array, use ...([ r[:] for r in input ])

edit²: other possibility: if you have a default argument targeting a list, a dict or a set, you'll have the same kind of troubles. Don't ever use a mutable defautl argument in python (unless you know exactly why you use it and how to use it)

Thank you so much, it is now working! :)
@Blind4Basics, you're probably right, I probably did mutate input without realising
Also, could you please explain how result = sort_last_char_correct(input[:]) works? I would love to know for future katas that I might make.

lst[:] is doing a shallow copy of lst. Try this:

def gna(lst):
    while lst: lst.pop()
    return "gnagna:" + str(lst)

lst = [1,2,3]
print(lst, gna(lst), lst)

lst = [1,2,3]
print(lst, gna(lst[:]), lst)

some_list[:] takes a slice of the list between its beginning and its end, effectively cloning the list. It's kinda abuse of the notation though, if I were to clone the list, I would just go with list.copy( ), I think.

Thank you for clarifying :)

thought so!

Question: Why can someone be against duplicates?

If you think you've fixed all the problems, try republishing a copy.

• Process of auto-retirement is known to be far from perfect and it's true that sometimes authors have not enough time to react and fix issues.
• You cannot republish a retired kata, buy you can always create and publish new version of it.
• There's a kind of tutorial how to create kata: https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Tutorial%3A-Create-Your-First-Kata . I don't like it that much, but it's still better than nothing.
• I am afraid that even if you fix all the issues, people will still downvote it because they won;t like the idea itself. Some can say it's a duplicate (I think I recall some "join words with some separator" kata), some can say it's not anything new (similar to this one for example: https://www.codewars.com/kata/517abf86da9663f1d2000003) so be ready for new issues and if you think otherwise, get some arguments ;)
• You can always share a link to draft of your kata here: https://gitter.im/Codewars/codewars.com/kata-authoring-help . People can review it and give you some feedback before you even publish it.

Thanks! : )

hi,

you cannot do anything to it anymore.

I took a quick look at your kata: the task wasn't properly described and it's actually too close to other kata we already have in the database so it would be sort of a duplicate anyway (hence, it's not a good idea to republish it).

if you're interested in creating kata, please read those docs:

• https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Tutorial%3A-Create-Your-First-Kata
• https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Kata-Creator

cheers

good to know. new here and stil figuring stuff out

Afaik retirement is final.

Thanks for confirming.

https://www.codewars.com/users/fireguy187/authored isn't it there as a draft? If I'm not wrong, you have to save it before Publish is available.

Nope, it isn't there. I didn't click save but the publish button had already appeared

Submitted solution is always available at /workspace/solution.txt. Read the file, check its length, done.

Thank you very much. It works. Can I have one more question? How to group tests? For example if the code failed the first set of basic tests, the 2nd or 3rd sets of tests won't start.

This depends on specific testing framework, and is language specific. You'd have to check documentation of the language (https://github.com/codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Languages-and-Test-Frameworks) and then use such feature of its testing framework, if available. I would not bother though, because, AFAIK, not many of them support the behavior you described.

Thanks a lot. I will take a look.

If possible, try adding translations to more popular languages, C++ isn't so popular imho.

Yes. When kata gets accepted, you get all remaining reward you did not get when it was in beta, both rank and honor.

Ok, Thanks! ;)

Yes, for a couple of reasons. You sohuld add translation even if author is inactive, it can be approved by power users too. But if kata does not allow contributors, then editing it directly can be the only option. But remember that as soon as you enter kata editor, you will never get any points from this kata anymore.

I supposed so, thanks for your reply

But if kata does not allow contributors, then editing it directly can be the only option.

?! I thought Allow Contributors didn't affect translation approval?

actually it made me wonder too. it would mean that old katas whose author is long gone and opted out 'allow contributors' could only be translated by 10,000 + honor power users directly editing the kata ?

na, I don't think so. Never go through the edit panel to create another language version. The restriction on the allow contributors could apply on the 'kind' of PU able to approve the translation, mayben yes (not even sure), but that option has no impact on the doability of the translation itself.

Please read this artice. Then go through the list of beta kata and read comments about most common mistakes.

thank you!

You should post this on kata's discourse tab, regardless if author is available or not (otherwise no one might notice it). If the author is inactive for some time, other users with enough honor can approve it.

Thanks for a quick reply. I've posted this on kata's discource tab at "Suggestions" tab. I put a "spoiler" flag on it, because I am not sure, that the link can not be seen by thoose who didnt finish the kata.
So, as for now, I should just wait for someone to approve? Okay, thanks again.

It seems like it attracted very few people.

Maybe give it a try ? :p

Why have you created 4 posts like this one? Delete the other 3, use Github Codewars Issue tracker

v

Maybe the kata already has a factor translation. It could be that it's not accepted yet.

Edit: yes it does.

I see! Thank you very much.

You have to complete a kata, and then you'll be able to translate it to other languages.

Don't advertize katas...

Post this in the kata section please, and mark it with a spoiler tag. Don't print the result after returning.

What n did you try on your computer? How long does your computer run your solution for n=-20? How long does your computer run your solution for n=1000000? Why did not you post a question in the kata discrouse?

fib(84362)

for fib(1000000)

real 0m43.723s user 0m41.752s sys 0m0.206s

the code is very simple: def fib(n): """Calculates the nth Fibonacci number""" print(n) a,b = 0,1 while n>1: if n%2 == 0: n-=2 a,b = a+b, a+2b else: n-=1 a,b = b, a+b #print(n,a,b) while n<0: if n%2 == 0: n+=2 a,b = 2a-b, b-a else: n+=1 a,b = b-a,a #print(n,a,b) if n==0: return a elif n==1: return b

print(fib(1000000))

I your code takes ~45s for fib(1000000), then it's too slow. There's a few tests with large numbers, largest being ~1000000, and you have only 12 seconds to execute all of them.

@zrhhust don't post code here, it can't be marked as having spoiler content, and why didn't you use that kata discourse in the first place?

Kata Beta Process

About

Discuss the kata approval and beta process here.

sorry,not know the rules very much. some trains have discuss button in it, but not this

https://www.codewars.com/kata/the-millionth-fibonacci-kata/discuss/

they all have the discuss button. If you don't see it, resize the window in your browser.

Hey there ! I saw you've modified the ranking of a kata i submitted without even solving it. This doesn't seem very logical to me. Any explanation ? The kata is "Castle of Cubes"

Hi Cépagrave - it doesn't appear to be a requirement of approving a kata that the moderator has solved it - I set the ranking based off the power-user average assessed rank, which was 5 kyu. I'm not likely to set the rank on any further katas without solving them as I found that doing so precludes the moderator from accruing honor when they then go on to solve.

I don't think that I should be setting the rank on a kata based on my personal opinion of how difficult it is or isn't, though - I'd much rather rely on a user average than my experience.

it doesn't appear to be a requirement of approving a kata that the moderator has solved it

It's actually highly discouraged to moderate a kata without solving it, please always solve it first. It's quite a bad idea to moderate a kata without solving it - what if you find a bug just trying to solve it? 😉

set the ranking based off the power-user average assessed rank

But remember that the average rank doesn't mean too much anymore, as ZED is trolling the ranks (see https://github.com/Codewars/codewars.com/issues/1939)

Duly noted, thanks Steffan, and my apologies to Cépagrave if I've undervalued your kata - I shall not be doing that again!

Reply to it and click "mark issue as resolved".

Solving more katas and looking at better solutions than yours (and understanding them ofc). Don't use caps, please.

Hi,

The main problem is that the idea of the kata itself is just bad, actually ("bad" as "bad for a kata"). What makes the things worse is that you're patching the holes along the way, meaning you actually didn't create the kata with a clear mind about what it implies to create something like this, and it and just "proves" (in a way) that the idea is bad. I agree that the original idea is kinda funny, but you'll waste sweat and blood, trying to enforce any-everything to get there, especially in JS, while at the same time, if you actually succeed at enforcing this special solution, most users will have a pretty bad expeirence at finding how to solve it.

As you can see (I hope), this kind of problem is more a lost cause than anything, when it comes to make a kata out of it.

cheers

Thanks for your reply! This is my first kata so I'm definitely still learning and appreciate your feedback.

I'm not trying to say the kata is "good" what I am saying is that I think it's pretty normal to fix tests during beta, is it not?

Now, you say:

What makes the things worse is that you're patching the holes along the way

but when I was reading about the beta process I came across this.

During this period it is important to leave feedback to the kata author about ways it can be improved. It is likely that during the beta process, many of the solutions will become invalid as feedback is given and test cases are added/modified.

I've solved much worse katas than mine and that's not to say I don't appreciate raising the bar for quality katas so to speak but your point about users having a bad experience at finding the solution is silly to me. I set the Discipline as Puzzle for this very reason, it's not a fundamental aspect of javascript that you'd reach for to solve something like this initially. I also set the estimated rank fairly high because I don't expect users to be able to bang this out like an 8 or a 7 kyu.

this kind of problem is more a lost cause than anything

I disagree with this point, this is something that was fun for me to throw together and I'm just unfamiliar with the process. I feel like at this point I have a pretty good test suite after going back and patching solutions that got past my original tests which I thought the beta process was for, partially. To get feedback and make any changes that need to be made.

I also feel like the auto-retire feature is too aggressive. I didn't get any feedback before just immediately having my kata retired by people who didn't even solve it correctly...

The one person who actually solved the kata the correct way enjoyed it, it was all the people who did it the wrong way that downvoted it which seems like it's in bad faith to me.

Again, thanks for your time and your feedback! I'm not sure anything will come of this but thanks for letting me vent.

See https://github.com/Codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Kata-Beta-Process

"Whoops! The page you were looking for doesn't seem to exist."

Dude where is the kata

And it is retired with no feedback as to why.

If anyone knows why it was retired (I understand the process, first four people voted it down) but not the reason.

On the popup menu at the top right of the screen there is a "New Kata" option.

I found the interface relatively straight forward to use.

Make sure your Kata is a new idea first by searching the existing Kata.

There are four important sections to fill out.

1. Your (hidden) solution.
2. The template for the solution that the user starts with.
3. The sample tests the user can see and edit.
4. The hidden tests required to solve. This is usually the sample tests, plus some random tests and any interesting edge cases.

https://www.codewars.com/topics/kata-best-practices

Create Kata privilege is 300 honor

https://github.com/Codewars/codewars.com/wiki/Privileges

damned if I know. Just popped back in after a year away from the site, spent tons of time polishing and refining my first kata, and almost as much time after that trying to get it approved. It's still beta, no clue why. Doesn't really matter, I suppose, since I'm not really active on the site anymore - but my frustration was a major reason for that tbh :/

So you have to put the circle in the box? Looks like a fun challenge, I'll try it out.

It'd be nice to see what the final rank of it would be, but I'm not too fussed, I enjoyed creating it.

It gets a new coder trying out every now and then and I chuckle to myself as I imagine the torture they are inflicting on themselves trying to work it out. As I once did when I first had too.

I see in the mean time it is out of beta. I agree it is quite demotivating that kata's remain in beta so long.

Looks like a cool Kata! Gonna try this one next

(congrats on being out of beta :))

• Wrong place, place this on the kata disccusion page.
• Mark this as a spoiler
• Kindly format your code at leaast.

For goodness sake, post this in the kata's discourse section: forum is not for helping with solutions, and your comment can't be marked as a spoiler here.

Sorry for the mistake. I wasn't find out the discussion board. Tahnks for your kindly help.

yes there is a problem, easy to overlook too.. but I dont know if I am aloud by the rules to point it out

@rt-hawk :

code-wars does not allow you to delete a kata as soon as a single person (excluding author) has solved it.

The best you can do is set it to a draft by unpublishing it. Although a better solution would be resolve the issue instead. Since you are the creator of the Kata you can resolve the issue by going to the comments clicking on reply (to the issue post). There on the bottom left - just above the submit button- is the mark issue as resolved, just do that instead ?

Also kata's that were converted to drafts are not visible to anyone from the authored kata list save the author himself. So you will need to manually provide a link to it.

Thank you. I will unpublish it since I have already recieved feedback in the new file.

I didn't know that I could mark an issue as being resolved. I will keep this in mind for the future. I would rather others who have found issues would do this as it is always better to have other people look at one's code. Others see the code from a different perspective.

Please post in that kata discussion, not here (it's unrelated).

Console.WriteLine(n)

And for goodness sake, post it in the kata discourse!

Is this a bug?

This is asking a wrong question in a wrong place...

Also here it can't be marked as containing spoilers.

elsif

ns = 0 # this is line 7

There it is your = in a conditional

and how the hell are you thinking that it's the correct place to ask for that!?? x)

=> post in the discourse section of THIS kata, not here. ;)

Thank you ever so much for your assistance. Did I mention that I was new here? So I'm grateful for any help I can get.

@Phil157 every kata has its own page for discussion. For "Factorial Decomposition", it's https://www.codewars.com/kata/5a045fee46d843effa000070/discuss

You can find the link to it on each of the kata page. Just click "Discourse" on https://www.codewars.com/kata/5a045fee46d843effa000070 for example.

Thanks for that. Sorry not to answer sooner, but I couldn't find my back! :o)

Does your function return the expected result in sample tests? When trying to publish the server checks both main and sample test suites, and if you pass only 1 (or 0) of them, you can't publish the kata.

In my Test Cases i've got 7 test, and when i validate them i pass all of them. In the Example Test i put 3 test from Test Cases.

Never mind, I press a lot of time RePublic, and Kata public)

Same case, I read somewhere that you should have 75 points of Honour at least. I got there. Now I would love to create some Katas. How do I do that?

Ups, just noticed it is actually 300 Honour points. Sorry. Back to problem solving :D

I had the same problem. Go to the navigation on the left on the second icon "Kata" and you will find a search field on the left top side of the new screen. Try to find with keywords of your lost kata.

Is there a link you your kata draft?

I deleted the random test cases and changed the Kata in Beta back to the one that worked so people could try it.

The Kata in Beta is here: https://www.codewars.com/kata/5a580064e6be38fd34000147

Here is the Initial Solution Code:

function birdCode(arr){

}

I found the issue. I just had to change the name of the function in the code for the random test. Before I had made it the same as the one in the solution code. So, it was calling the wrong one. Once I changed that function name, the new code validated and republished successfully.