A : '@',
B : '8',
C : '(',
D : 'D',
E : '3',
F : 'F',
G : '6',
H : '#',
I : '!',
J : 'J',
K : 'K',
L : '1',
M : 'M',
N : 'N',
O : '0',
P : 'P',
Q : 'Q',
R : 'R',
S : '$',
T : '7',
U : 'U',
V : 'V',
W : 'W',
X : 'X',
Y : 'Y',
Z : '2'
Thats 26 if statment!!!
TO MUCH IF STATMENTS!!!

I agree (:

done

done.

Done for all.

What about npw?

Does it give you any more details? Because forking is not revelaing any conflict in the description.

See what happens when you drink too much? You lose consciousness and forget everything for years.

All fixed :)

Sample tests are already present

Do you really want me to reveal the tick instead of having fun with it yourself?
Hint : It has the same structure with the one on the left o_O

Fixed

Will write to you via gitter once I found some spare time.

Hey, Pete! We really need to catch up, ah! And thanks for reporting the typo, will fix it once I am done with the c++ translation.

I am fine, all good on your side too?

done thank you :)

Pass a copy of the array to the user's function or get the expected answer first. You're allowing the user to mutate the input so your testing code produces wrong expected values.
In the random tests, you're not using a at all, you can remove it.

I may be wrong here, but i was interested by what was happening here that i started to look at it(Dont know much Java myself.) but the only thing i can see is that maybe it is because in your code you modify the original array. I believe this change to the array makes just the 1's and 0's remain in the array when it is sent to the test function so there is nothing for it to remove and it give the expected answer of just 1's an 0's and nothing removed. Hope this makes sense.