Doesn't it? It is a part of the story... Is it not good excersise and fun?
If I just ask for the key decoding would it be better because more unique?
Is this really an 'Issue'?
Soon there will be no room for new Katas... there will always be something similar.
I mark as 'resolved' as I do not know where the issue is..

It is a bit different...

Yey, I've missed that.
Thanks
Fixed

Thanks.
Fixed.

Yup. Thanks!
Fixed.

Thank you.
PL

OK. Got it.
Thanks for a nice explanation - I appreciate it.

That was a good lesson.
Cheers
PL

Well...
Still do not get why this input validation is so bad... and causes issue comments... it test the code and gives clue what the task is about...
I was trying to find similar Kata... none of them was a code that could be used in real life.
Yeah... the forecast for my Kata is not optimistic :) This is my first try... quite dissapointing :)
Thanks for feedback

I meant the code should deal with inputs which is not a positive integer... this is what I would put into my friend's rolling dice code...

I do not get it...
Why the multiple return type is unacceptable? I will improve input checking...
I think I have fixed the randomness check... can you show a non-random solution passing the test?

Fixed.
Thanks

Oh, Ok... I understand.
I was not sure waht does 'retired' mean.
Thanks,
PL

Maybe not fully fixed... but...
I think my fix is good enough, isn't it? I realize that the list of random integers is not a good practice for the result (I was not aware of that writing this Kata and had very hard time to do the tests - as this is my first Kata and first testing ever).
However, modification of the task to return a specific data would make it out of sense (I think...).
I was tryng to check the randomness - I hoped all values (1-6) check in 1000 rolls will make the job. I was thinking to exclude a common ways of workarounds like [1,2,3,4,5,6,1,1,1,1,...] or [1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,...] - this would improve the randomness but not fully eliminate the ways for workarounds... there will always be a way of creating something passing the tests.
Eliminating any non-random set is not correct teorethicly - they are possible (very low chance but still you can get [1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,...] right?).

I will improve the randomness a bit and leave the Kata for now with the issues unsolved...
Thanks for the links - I will do the homework and see how to fix that.

Is the current shape of this Kata bad enough to not Publish it?

Thansk for feedback.
PL

Did not know... it;s a bit confusing noun :)
Thanks.

Issues fixed.