You are right, thanks. I added some break lines for the text be easier to read. I forgot initially that I have privilege to do that kkk

I am impressed with how the informations are bad organized. What are the name of the tables as example? Why blank lines are not inserted to make the text more clear?

I only saw a similar Kata, not a exactly equals kata

The test returned me that in Javascript I used the character "r". But I only used ASCII codes

You are right, solved, thanks

Adjusted, thanks, but Codewars said to me that I can't republish until I solve the issues, I only saved.

Oh, I saw the checkbox under this message kkk.

Simple to solve, very simple, but excellent, conceptual kata.

It would be cool improove the description. You have to start with true. And only switch to the opposite boolean value if the value of the item is flick. This is not clear in the description. But after talking to a friend, I understood. The kata is simple, as expected to a 8 kyu kata.

It is easy. The table name is "decimals". Make an alias of the field resulted of the rounding proccess. Pay attention to the text of the exercise. It is easy, the description is a little (only a little, not too much) poor, but you will can solve this problem.

You are right. We don't need the "else" statment because the previous "returns". Also, the other friend is right too, the right way to compare string (motivations of this in other answer here) is using the .equals(). I adjusted my solution.

Also I don't like "if" clausules without curly braces, although the code will have more lines. More clear is better. I adjusted the spacements too :)

Thank you guys!

Ok, it was a cool kata. But force to check if is a string or not was not very cool. Not a challenge, only a trouble more...

"does not use LIMIT, FETCH, or window functions"

Don't have sense. Isn't in the description. "Limit" is a valid SQL technique

My Ruby code pass in the tests (here in the platform), but receives this return in the final version:

#<NoMethodError: undefined method expect' for main:Object Did you mean? exec> main.rb:19:in block (2 levels) in '
/runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:180:in wrap_error' /runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:72:in it'
/runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:206:in it' main.rb:18:in block in '
/runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:55:in block in describe' /runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:46:in measure'
/runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:51:in describe' /runner/frameworks/ruby/cw-2.rb:202:in describe'
main.rb:17:in `'

Perfect idiot Kata. "Falsy value was overwritten by a truthy value: expected 1 to equal null". I don't have a tip to solve this problem. Idiot Kata,

Is a little confusing to think, to me too. But after some refactoring I completed this Kata. Think: you are speaking that 110 produces a fine and 100 no. It don't have sense.

80 <= 100 ok
100 <= 100 ok
110 is not < 100

Now you only have to calculate the fees :)