Do you have any benchmark about your claims?

I'm the only one doing this solution in the whole platform! Are you kidding me?

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/5220c5750b1ba099360003e2/groups/6592621718069100013f0ac7

And it's so far from this one, you have mentioned:

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/5220c5750b1ba099360003e2/groups/55213b8f48b3baa1b90009ff

This solution, there is only one who has the same solution as me, he solved it before me as his last visit is at 2023, but that doesn't mean I have copied it from him!

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/52b7ed099cdc285c300001d0/groups/64ee72de3078400001e80bd4

These 2 solutions are the only valid solution for each problem:

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/59b82d99aee0c7744000004a/groups/59b82d9aaee0c7744000004c

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/591e83ce66ef3bd8d300085f/groups/5bbd416016a8f134a20004ca

So all users must do them in the same way to pass, because if it isn't in the only same way, it's not correct!

Don't expect any another reply from me, I'm currently out of this platform, as you are doing your best to spoil the community here..

Can you suggest how to prevent users from using require?

• The debounce function is designed to enhance performance by controlling the frequency of function executions

The above sentence is 100% correct, preventing the function from excution if nobody has called it for a specified amount of time, can affect the frequency of function executions!

And yes, I always use ChatGPT to validate my solutions, rephrase kata description, and suggest edge cases for testing, is there any problem with that?

Do you have some time to read the problem description?

You may use either linear search or binary search.

I think everything is okay now after adding the last test cases, and modifing the existing ones, besides modifing the task description and solution.

Now, I'm testing the mutation of the original array, thanks for the valuable advice.

I have added more test cases, added random testing, and modified large leaderboard test.

Feel free to inform me if there is something wrong.

I can add random testing, but what about Insufficient fixed edge case tests.? do you have any different case that needs to be tested?

Also can you explain what do you mean by Large test is vulnerable to input modification.?

But I haven't specified to mutate or not, everyone can go for the suitable solution he needs, sometimes mutation is better than returning a new value, because it can keep the number of variables low, and also the memory usage, am I wrong?

Inserting player is not tested, only the updated leaderboard is tested.

How can I test inserting the player?

If the updated leaderboard is correct, then the player has been inserted correctly..

thank you so much

Can someone tell me why my solution is not passing all test cases?

function isHappy(n, pow) {
  const cachedValues = [n]
  while (true) {
    const digits = n.toString().split("").map(Number)
    let total = 0
    for (let i = 0; i < digits.length; i++) {
      total += Math.pow(digits[i], pow)
    }

    if (total === 1) {
      return [1]
    }

    if (cachedValues.includes(total)) {
      cachedValues.push(total)
      return cachedValues
    }

    n = total
    cachedValues.push(total)
  }
}