I'm wondering if this kata should be adjusted.. At least the ruby version, I'm browsing the solutions and not a single one is actually solving the kata, they are all just variations of gaming the system to allow the native '+' function to work.

I got something working for adding positive numbers, but negatives are much harder. Especially when there's no way to add the "-" to the final result without triggering the "no +/-" rule...

I see it's very similar, but not available in Ruby. Am I able to add a ruby version to that kata?

Ah, thanks for pointing that out, fixed now

This blows my mind.

Nice job!

Codewars says 2 people have successfully completed this in ruby, could one of those people confirm the description?

I feel like if I'm the only one unclear, it would be a question, but since there are so many comments about the vagueness of the problem, I feel like it is a genuine issue

As pretty as a one-liner is, this answer would be amazing if put into heavily commented 3 or 4 lines. Nice idea, to scan into arrays of X and / sequences!

You've changed it in the tests, but please also change it for the default code provided (suggesting the method name, then testing another method name, is a pretty mean trick)

You're right, s.split.all? { |w| numbers.include?(w) } is cleaner, I didn't know all? could receive a block.

Your second suggestion, I know it's faster, but unless you are doing a few thousand/million iterations, the speed wont be noticeable. The code I wrote feels more human readable, which makes it more valuable code in my books.

Thanks! This is my first authored kata. I fixed up the tests and tweaked the solution (I'm using the gsub route).

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/55e345c0294e8a1d87000036/groups/58e37502d4440ad13a0006aa

Found a similar cheat to another challenge. Turns out it's the same person.

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/58c9f332a677713d6f000115/groups/58e4dd466caed00c24000675

This user didn't even try the kata, but just overrode all == functions to return true...

Ruby solvers—it's important to realise the fitness method returns fractions, ugh that held me up for hours.