Another incorrect solution that needs to be addressed: https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/61f3163624fe410017d0378f/groups/654a520847febc0001406501

column one is the current score. All others are the remaining plays against each team.

This as well isn't explained properly in the description.

The kata clearly needs polishing, so I'll push it back to draft for now.

Cheers

Hi,

• you didn't explain what is the winning condition
• you didn't say if there is any time/perf constraint
• are you sure you wanna provide the preloaded tool? With it, the kata boils down to "how do I convert this to that?", doesn't it?

(aside of that, just as usual, the wiki documentation, is just awful to use... Like, after reading 2 pages, I've still no idea about what the "sink" is...)

cheers

can you explain how this test works?

l = [75, 0, 3, 8, 7, 3]
    [71, 3, 0, 2, 7, 4]
    [69, 8, 2, 0, 0, 0]
    [63, 7, 7, 0, 0, 0]
    [49, 3, 4, 0, 0, 0]

t = 1

assuming both teams play ideally and team 1 always wins against team 0, team 1 can attain a maximum points of 71 + 3 + 0 + 2 + 7 + 4 = 87, while team 0 can attain a maximum points of 75 + 8 + 7 + 3 = 93. meaning that team 1 can't win. the test expects the contrary tho. is there something im missing?

• error assertion message is not very helpful
• assert equals is a better function (since some tests pass if i return a tuple, for example)

Issue persists.

From the output I assume that you are not using test.assert_approx_equals(...) which would provide the expected information upon failure.

Error-margin Tests are not debuggable!

They do not reflect by how much my model deviates from the expected result. The output is just Error to big..

Either

1. The upper limit of the RSME you use in the test cases should be clarified in the kata description
2. or a failed test should print by how much the error margin was overstepped
3. or a failed test should print what the expected y-coordinate (± error_margin) was

The Object-Oriented Programming tag is needless for this kata.

Of course, way easier than what I was building. Thank you!

I am satisfied to inform you, that your solution now fails successfully ;)

Closing this.

I understand. But I have also heard the opposite.

My opinion would be that if the act of formulating a solution from the problem is considered X-kyu, then the kata should be rated X-kyu.

But I guess, it is not for me to decide.

Thanks for hinting that!

Letting you know, that I am currently working on a fix.

However, it turns out that it is not that trivial to do.
If you have any suggestions, I am eager to hear what you propose.

For me, to understand the logic of this kata is 4 kyu, but coding is 6 kyu.

It is dufficult to choose...

yeah, 50ms is ok. My "microoptimized" O(n^3) solution (that must be arround N² on average, I guess) takes way longer than that, so it's ok against the expected time complexity.

About that, I don't know if this is that a spoiler. Even with that info, I have so far no idea about how to do that. x)

OK, closing. And I guess I'll never solve it. x)