xdranik, i love your solution. battlerattle I also like the creative thinking of yours even if it isn't efficient.

You are absolutely correct! Ugh! I have created a couple forks that I believe resolve that bug.

random() can be overloaded as in my answer.
You should use some test cases where the number is fixed, and some tests case where the number is random(and don't put it into a function).

At this point its too late to change the rating.

6 kyu is correct for this one - check out my solution, you can just use brute force.

Agreed, I ended up hard coding that particular case just because it made no sense for it to behave that way.

Array.isArray is now located here: http://www.codewars.com//kata/525a4cab1650d76b8000084d/discuss/javascript

1. thanks
2. done
3. it can be unfrozen, no ?

Howdy,

I just tried this in ruby, and it seems that there are some ruby 2.0 solutions being excluded.

I was confounded by this too. If you are going to specify something for this case, specify throwing an exception.

My code has the following:

if (shouldUseTheFuckingWeirdRequirement()) {
  doSomethingThatMakesNoSenseWhatsoever();
}

I agree. This behaviour is entirely arbitrary.

Forum comments are now sorted by most recent.

What did you have in mind?