Approved.

Even if you would not go the way I proposed, there are still some things which could be improved in your current translation:

• Fixed tests could also use ExtraMessage
• I would suggest breaking fixed tests with It(should_return_false) into separate, explicit blocks with separate fixed tests for specific input scenarios: negative values, zeros, correct cubes, positive incorrect cubes, etc.

Would you please check out this fork with my proposal of some techniques: https://www.codewars.com/kumite/6402634f431f2dd2eb7ee797. This is more or less how I would like the things to be done, but you do not necessarily have to adapt all of them if you think they are, for some reason, wrong.

Much better, thanks! Still, a couple of remarks:

• solution function should not be marked as static (needs to be changed in two snippets).
• Additional messages look good, but they ahould not be presented by printing to std::cout, but rather by using ExtraMessage function passed into assertion. Please see the article I linked for examples and details.
• Input scenarios are nice, but:
  • Generator for inputs of type side: -5, volume, -125, expected: false is missing,
  • I would have a suggestion regarding order of execution of inputs, but it's a bit longwinded for discourse. Would be great if you'd poke me over Codewars Discord if possible. If you dn;t want to join it's also fine, just let me know, and I will explain one additional suggestion here.

In general, nice work!

Same problem with decode - SEGV. Didn't check for an empty string.

ok, I found the translation and approved it. Tests are updated accordingly. I didn't get description conflicts, so I hope everything is good...

@Heathro: the changes of a translation are applied only when it's approved.

actually, working with forks can mess the things up too

Oh ok. Good to know...

but when I enter translation I see updated

Is there a link to this updated fork? I don't think you can self-approve it (someone else should do it).

@Heathro: you saw my answer above? (the issue)

(actually, working with forks can mess the things up to, considering how the forking process is working right now, so... For now, there is no "best way"... Hopefully fixed in near future)

It was mine java translation

Yes I noticed. It's not that bad in this case, and if you really know what you're doing, it's probably ok. But usually it's better to just work with a fork, so you don't accidently mess something up :P (you can see which lines you changed or removed)

na, that's ok if you're the translator.

It's okay for you to fix in editor as long as you know how and what to fix, then all good !!!

Do NOT go around editing other users' katas. If there is an issue, you should raise one, or publish a fork with working tests, NOT editing the kata directly.

It's

[C# translation](https://www.codewars.com/kumite/609fc031df939b004970695b?sel=609fc031df939b004970695b)

C# translation