100ants

- Minotauer
- commented on "Square root without using library : math" kata
its right not only for js
- 100ants
- commented on "Hexadecimal conversion" kata
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
- JohanWiltink
- commented on "Require without calling it" javascript solution
Is this solution dependent on lodash being loaded already?

That would be a bit unfair to solvers that don't know that, wouldn't it? If they don't know, they can't abuse it.
- JohanWiltink
- created an issue for "Require without calling it" kata
Your example tests do not test at all, and your submit tests do not enforce the requirements.

I haven't actually read your tests, but if they do not prohibit cheating in the way you describe, that is a problem as well. Politely asking solvers not to cheat is not enough.
- 100ants
- created an issue for "Square root without using library : math" kata
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
- Pluriscient
- commented on "The builder of things" kata
probably it should be arm.having as a.t.m. that goes unused
- 100ants
- created a question for "The builder of things" kata
I'm a bit confused with this:
```
// can define number of things in a chainable and natural format
jane.has(2).arms.each(arm => having(1).hand.having(5).fingers )
```
Should having() be defined in outer scope or it is the test error?
If should, how could we know we know for which Thing we are calling having()?