C#: method name should be PascalCase (Please refer to implementation of backward compatibility here )

                      x
                      x
                       x       xxxx          xx
                        xxxx xxxxxxxxxx     xx
                   xxxx  x             xxxxx
                xxx             2       xxxx
              xxx           x         x x   xxx
             xx                     xx        xx
            xx                x   xx           xx
            x                  xxx               x
            x                  xx                 x
           x       1         xx   x                x
           x                x      x      3         x
           x               xx       xx              x
           x              x    5     xx              x
           x             x             xx            x
       xx xx xx x xx x  x xxxxxxxx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxx xx x xx xx xx x x x x x xxxx xxxxxx
           x           x                 xx          x
           x         x                    xx         x
            x   6                           x    4   x
            xx      x         7              x      xx
             xx                               x     x
              xx  x                            x   x
                xxx                             x x
               x  xxxx                         xxx
                      xxxxx                xxxx   x
            xx              x xxxxxxxxxxx x       x
            x                                      x
                                                    x
                                                    x
                                                     x
                                                     x

It seems to me that the picture on the left preceeds the picture on the right; that the three arrows are suggesting you move the three lines inwards, forming the second scenario.

I actually figured it out and came to delete my comment. Might as well leave it up since your image is a good example. Thanks for sharing!

I found this online Ignore the left one, I am not sure what it means.

Yeah my nickname isn't the easiest xD

well at least you know that ;)

Yeah my nickname isn't the easiest xD And thanks for spotting the error.

fixed. closing the issue.

thanks @dfhwzwe

FTW found a bug in the random test verification method. I will let him verify and resolve this issue.
ut-actual comparison while result was set in ut-actual-numeric.

I've just tried now and it seems ok. I didn't understand what was the problem?

Could you check now?

I Think you're wrong. I've controlled it in a fork, and it' not as you say. Then I tried the attempt tests from the trainer, printing first cut and then the result my function returns, and here is a sample of what I get:

00000640+
00205121+
Testing                                                                         
Log
00000194+
00018916+
Testing                                                                         
Log
00000583+
00170237+
Testing                                                                         
Log
00000598+
00179102+
Testing                                                                         
Log
00000711+
00253117+
...
You have passed all of the tests! :) 

What makes you think that?