I'm having timeout issues with a basic recursive depth first search for board size 10. Also, really got to complain about using 1..0 as ranks, requiring special handling. Since a 10x10 chess board isn't "real" anyway, you should use 0..9.

If you insist that 'invalid-inPutBad' is bad input, then the description of this Kata must change to "validate and convert" between the various types.

This appealed to me as a chessplayer and former tournament director. The data manipulation part is challenging and fun.

But the formatting instructions are poor and fiddly. For example, the tests are counting the number of '='s in the 2nd row "underliny" part, which has no spec. And the formatting is, frankly, a bit silly - in real life this would be put into a table in HTML, PDF, JSON, a database, etc... Maybe I'll return to the formatting to complete the kata, but it's unappealing.

@JohanWiltink: Your duplicate (and empty) values are just a "trick", not mentioned in your spec. Your spec is silent on what to do with duplicates, as is the bash shell documentation you reference, I think this "edge" case should be clearly documented (i.e., given as an example) in your spec. Or, better yet, eliminated.

The bash spec explicitly prohibits empty braces: "A correctly-formed brace expansion must contain ... at least one unquoted comma" (see https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Brace-Expansion.html)

"a string of that number in English" is not specific enough. For example, is 4400 "four thousand four hundred" or "forty four hundred"? And hyphenation?

Seems a bit simple for a 5kyu

IMO, the actual problem was too easy (for it's level), but there are so many special cases ("ignore if only 1 letter", the flaky sorting, why not just return an array instead of a long string?) which made this harder that it should have been.

Yes, I know it's 3+4i. Apparently I'm lost on how you do sinc for a complex number. (UNless I completely missed it, This is something you leave out of the instructions). One Wikipedia article implied that you just take the sinc of the real and the imaginary parts, independently, but that seems to be wrong. I have yet to find a definition of sinc(someComplexNumber) Sorry, I'm gonna downvote this Kata as it is more "lookup complex math online" instead of programming.

Basically I end up cutting and pasting a ton of code from complex number libraries. You're lucky I can't downvote till I finish and at this point I'm unlikely to finish. :-) And next time provide something better than just non-OO global functions Re() and Im(), they are awful.

Test is wrong for sinc(ComplexNumber(3,4)). Wolfram says that sinc(3) is 0.470, sinc(4) is -0.189

In JavaScript, console.log() works. Not sure about other languages, give printf() or whatever a try.