Cause then they can't be accessed in the separate NASM module that we're writing

I meant that the two strings in the test runner are static, so only available to that compilation unit.

Are the two strings supposed to be static? Cause then they can't be accessed in the separate NASM module that we're writing as far as I can tell

You are basically brute-forcing the issue. By using the hint given in the descrption you can get a huge reduction in the possible solution space.

Because the instructions stated not to use dam or Hm.

excluding decameters and hectometers

This was probably to simplify the problem.

I have updated the description. Hope it helps.

Vector direction is important. In this example it goes downwards, so the point is to the right of tge vector. Let me know if you need more detailed explanation.

Just got point = [-6015, 3783] and vector = [[-1639, 9654], [-1263, 4157]] as a random test case. Seems pretty obvious that the point is left of the line segment. This graph makes that evident. Am I misinterpretting the question? The way I see it, it's asking if the point is left/right/on the line if the given line segment were extended infinitely in both directions.

'9.99hm' should equal '999m'

Why would '999m' be prefered over '9.99hm'?

This would actually be a really good problem to help people get comfortable with recursion. Recursion was the first way I thought of solving this, I didn't realize until after submitting and seeing the other solutions that there was a constant depth to the nesting.

I feel like this would be even more interesting if it could flatten nested lists. For example:

flatten([[1, 2, [3, 4, [5, 6, 7, [8]], 9]]]) --> [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]

I feel like this should be able to be accomplished using reduce and recursion somehow, but I can't think of how without typechecking :/