Glanced over, and yes its the same algorithm. Yet it still looks better than my stuff lol

I had to implement addition by columns like in first grade, you know? For this to work...

Is this code the same type of thinking or what? Cause I don't feel like looking up libs you used

Duplicate found: https://www.codewars.com/kata/59cabf6baeb28482b8000017

You should not verify solutions on exact match with ref sol, instead allow for a small amount rate of y values to be of by 1.

found: · is not .

I'm sure this is a duplicate. I believe user anter made such a kata before.

What a fun figuring out the discrepancy here:

expected: <
··●●······
·●··●·····
●····●····
······●··●
·······●●·>

but was: <
..●●......
.●..●.....
●....●....
......●..●
.......●●.>

The real point was that I just wanted to get into discussion with you 😅 No, all joking aside... In retrospect, I should have already made these changes myself.

How is anybody supposed to come up with this? 😅

My solution works now. But to be fair, your former result seemed to be more correct on the mathematical level. Can you spoiler your original formula please? I am interested why it gave these results.

Thanks for the comment! I corrected the formular. Can you please check if the problem persists?

Thanks for the comment! I corrected the formular. Can you please check if the problem persists?