;-)

Just a slight difference in the example tests, which I hvae corrected. In the main test cases, all languages have exact same basic tests.

I have also updated input range.

sorry , I misunderstood.

...Have you actually took the time to open the edit page or something and check? It's literally just there.

Alright I'll copy the sample tests directly to here then.

JS:

describe("Basic tests", function(){
Test.assertEquals(solve(100),99);
Test.assertEquals(solve(10),9);
Test.assertEquals(solve(48),48);
Test.assertEquals(solve(521),499);
Test.assertEquals(solve(59195),58999);
Test.assertEquals(solve(72694),69999);
Test.assertEquals(solve(999999999992),999999999989);
});

Python:

Test.it("Basic tests")
Test.assert_equals(solve(100),99)
Test.assert_equals(solve(48),48)
Test.assert_equals(solve(10),9)

Ruby:

describe "Simple max digit sum" do
  it "Basic tests" do    
    Test.assert_equals(solve(100),99)
    Test.assert_equals(solve(48),48)
    Test.assert_equals(solve(10),9)    
  end 
end

Look, a whole bunch of test cases is missing in the Python and Ruby test cases, and without them we'd have no ideas about the performance requirement until hitting the actual tests.

I'm not sure I follow.

Sample tests are consistent. Please specify differences.

Secondly, what are these additional performance tests that JS has? Tests are identical across.

I will add input range.

yes, there is a sample test case in python.

JS version has additional performance sample tests that would completely change the nature of the kata.

Please:

• Make sample tests consistent across languages
• State the input range

There is no such sample tests.

Are some of sample tests wrong.
sove(91) should return 89 but in sample case it shows 99.

I think there is some criteria for minimum honor to unlock solution section without solving it, so you have to solve more problems and unlock that button.