There are already many arithmetic expression search katas. What makes this kata special from those ones?

I added asserts in the test cases (and in the solution for some checks at another level). Please tell me if there remain some issues.

Ok, I will study that. Thanks for the feedback!

Messages from tests are not really helpful:

• ValueError: list.remove(x): x not in list, or
• ValueError: not enough values to unpack (expected 3, got 1), or
• TypeError: cannot unpack non-iterable int object,
• ... etc

It would help if tests did some preliminary checks and explained what is an actual problem rather than crashin.

M'enfin !

If somebody sends me a link to this kata, does it count as being rickrolled?

It's just to know whether I should punch them or not.

Apparently cubic time passes the test. Ashamed to have had to submit though.

Thank you too. :-)

Modified, thanks.

I wanted to check whether this kata existed, and now I have confirmation I fear the moment when I try it. :-)

For the test in Caml, we get a warning because of the use of the now deprecated functions (lower|upper)case. It would be nice to edit the kata and replace by the same function with _ascii appended to the name.

Worked perfectly for me. My solution is rather naive (I could optimize it further if it had timed out... :)) - I reckon this is good to go, I don't reckon it's less than 4kyu.

Fair enough :)

Hi,

Actually, the rules forbid the use of nonpositive integers, as well as non integers.
Your solution may as well be [[2, '-', 1], [6, '+', 25], [100, '-', 1], [31, '+', 99], [7, '*', 130]], which would be accepted.

I am confident that the implementation of this rule is easy and will validate your code. :)

Hi, I'm seeing a strange error. As far as I can tell my answer is correct for the first given test, it produces one of the 60ish valid solution permutations.

But during your validation phase, it seems the code fails with no explanation of the reason:

Test Results:
 Log
Input  - numberslist: [1, 2, 6, 7, 25, 100], target: 910
Result - val: 910, error: 0
Output - solution: [[1, '-', 2], [6, '+', 25], [100, '+', -1], [31, '+', 99], [7, '*', 130]]

STDERR:
Traceback:
   in <module>
   in execute
AssertionError

Are you expecting a specific solution, and if so, what criteria are you using to determine which solution should be returned of all the available solutions?