I don't think this is intended: https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/5e8de403344c4600018054b1/groups/678d894556ad14fe87d3a5ea

Filter the code for useless character before asserting the code length restriction. That way the user may keep comments and whitespace in their solution.

I genuinely believe this is the hardest kata I have ever solved. Nothing has ever taken me 800 lines of code.

I understand your point, my comments aren't personal, I just believe your logic does not apply in this case.

First of all, I feel like middle ground katas aren't all that great. If the harder version already exists, the user might as well solve that one. However, even in this case, the solution is just way too similar to already existing katas (famous ones at that).

Maybe if the kata was a subset of a less solved kata or harder one, but Million Fib is one of the most popular 3kyu on the site (4th most solve), so you have 12000 people that will solve this for free.

Also, if you can author a kata such that I can copy and paste it's solution on any other kata and still pass, then yeah, I'll give that point to you, just waiting until that happens :)

This is basically an easier version of this kata.

It's also just one extra line than most Fibonacci katas.

Take a look at the changes and see it you agree.

I tried to leave most of the language specific things in the initial solution, rather than in the description. You can make any changes you like.

Approved, thanks for the translation!

Approved, thanks for the translation!

Approved, thanks for the translation. Sorry for the delay, I know nothing about Haskell, so I couldn't review it myself.

Hey, mate, thanks fo rthe translation.

This kata is a bit old, so I just took a look at the tests and stuff and wasn't all that happy with it, so I updated it a bit.

I simplified the fixed tests a bit (it should be easier for you to include them) and I change the upper bound for the integer size, now the answer will always fit into a 64 bit signed integer (not sure if this matters for Haskell).

I also updated the description to be more language agnostic, so that one description should hold for all languages.

Could you please update your translation for these little changes?

Personally, i always saw tuples mainly as fixed size lists rather than immutable ones. I like using them for "return a pair" or to represent coordinates in a grid.

But still, why does it matter if the input or output are immutable? What makes this kata any different from other katas that have sequences as input? Pretty much all other katas use lists as input and output, even though those values are just as immutable as this kata's.

Why are we using tuple instead of list? Also, wouldn't it be better for the input to be a 2D array of bool instead of int?

I believe goldenratio and me were mostly joking about approving the kata.

But how do you dedupliacte a kata, besides unpublishing it?

It's a real shame, I was about to approve it.

Maybe argue that, since your input is a pair of lists and the other is a list of pairs, they are different katas? lol