Thank you for the explanation. 5 years later it is still providing value!

Thanks. It's really not a big deal, I overengineer sometimes too. I think the wording in Kata prompt certain approaches -- like the graph approach. I try to find novel approaches and this one struck me when I was thinking about properties of triplets.

Nice, I really over engineered my version (polite way of putting it). This is clean and simple - no idea where my mind went!

not clean or maintainable by other team members. clever to cram everything together and i also think the big O performance of this solution will be terrible

Thanks for the explanation. I think I learned more on this kata than any other on the site despite my solution being ridiculously long.

nice solution

Keep in mind that this kata is not tagged as a performance kata. It is not calling for code to be tuned/optimized. This solution runs more than fast enough to finish within the 12 seconds that codewars allows.

Had this been an actual performance kata, I would have tuned my approach until it finished the test cases in the allowed time.

I suggest creating a performance variant of this kata if you're interested in taking it there. The problem sizes for this kata is currently limited to 26 letters. You'd want to mark the new kata with a performance tag and test and include tests that would keep naive or unoptimized solutions from finishing within Codewars' 12 second limit.

The way my solution "works" is so scuffed now that I look at Your work.Thank You for Your explanations how it works.

True!

I thought the same, but i written an more extensive code , because i'm dosnt understood indexOf method. Now i understand it and i have more power xd

Wow! Thanks for a great explanation. I loved the breakdown of the algorithm you used. Learned a LOT from this one!

This looks very inefficient.

I'm glad that you take the time to read others' solutions. With a good attitude and a desire to improve, you'll come up with some great solutions to other kata.

@slowold .. Exacto