def init(self): is invisible and always exists while creating an object.

So if you don't add and args to it, you can pull it down.

very nice!

not an issue.

indeed they are^^

Fun kata, but should include better definition of how to handle punctuation -- is matching '.' and ',' required to qualify as a match? Would be nice to include that in the instructions, and ideally test cases as well.

Should probably include a test case or two to get people started

Practially, it doesn't make any difference. The init method automatically returns none, so you don't need to include that instruction in your code. The 'pass' keyword does nothing, it is basically just a placeholder to keep Python from getting angry that you didn't include an indented block in the init method. If you used an empty return, or return None, you'd get the same results, you're just doing a little more work than you need to.

Okay, my bad, thank you for your reply. :)

In the task description:

"Implement a function, which takes a non-negative integer"

So non-negative is assumed already. In production code this obviously would want some additional robustness, but based on the description of the task the solution fits.

The tests pass, and those are the final say anyway.

Werent we supossed to check if there is a negative number? Because I can't see it in this code¨.

Too much data entry required

It seems like everyone is doing the same thing with pass. I didn't pass or return and it worked. Is pass safer or better practice? How does it compare to an empty return?

Your variable names are hilarious.

This is a fair requirement, but should it be mentioned as part of the instructions, or be visible in the user-facing test suite? If there are specific requirements around exception handling, I think the user should be able to see them.