would have been more elegant to just use reverse string slicing.

I don't.

What sort of data format is the kata expecting the answers in? I see parenthesis, but tuples are not mutable... would it accept the correct answers in a list format?

A couple things that suck about this approach

1. No need to change the type to str in the f string literal, this is done by placing the variables in the quotes
2. too many variables-new minutes and new hours can be renamed to updated minutes and hours and thus new minutes and new hours can be totally eliminated
3. To avoid additional conditionals, view mauro-1's approach

Although syntactically and semantically correct, this could use refactorization

So does "h%24 or 24 " work because in the instance that 24%24 will yield 0, which will evaluate to False (truthy value of 0 is false) in a boolean "or" expression, so then the expression will evaluate to the 24 (because 24 would be True so 24 is selected), correct?

Mr or Ms Mauro-1, can you please explain how the second part of your return statement works? I still cannot figure out how the M%60:02' portion works, specifically the 02 portion

I have the same problem. I like python, but sometimes I think my thought process lends itself to a more C or java type language.

My solution is stupid because:

1. No need to make a list of s, string is iterable, just not mutable
2. Just need the if condition, no need to return anything it all if not meeting condition and thus no need for else conditional
3. In addition, by doing the above, I could entirely simplify the list comprehension AND also get rid of the assignment statement

Horrible.

This was a cool little kata

Ok now I don't feel so worthless if a 4ky took two weeks to do this. I am a lowly 5 kyu and I was frustrated I couldn't get it in one hour and thought that implied I was too dumb for this:) thank you sir or ma'am for encouragement.

sorry we are not privy to your inherent knowledge of flower games.

Oh my god I could have saved myself so much work by making 6==0

Please specify that the numbers can be > 6, and and will begin counting through again upon iterations of multiples of six.

my solution for this problem sucks horribly. don't waste your cognitive capacity looking at it.

sometimes I am so stupid it is astounding. I make things so much harder than it needs to be