What was the point of doing this in only 3 functions? I ended up having to repeat code in two different public methods because of that...

RIP Pemdas

🥲

Is this still solvable today?

I want to express my small frustration with this kata, because it's not clear whether the expression must be evaluated on each call, or if it has to be calculated at the ending method call. And as it turned out, the first variant is the correct one.

No matter how i try guys i will never can fix any of these questio nim trying guys i cant well .... there is othing wec an do ? ? can anyone understand me?

The instructions say that this is a valid example of the pattern

 x
  x
x o x
x
 x

However what the kata actually wants you to do

  x
   x
x o x
 x
  x

It's pretty logical, but also very misleading to have false examples in the instructions

JS sample test is broken: it does not trim the lines of the expected value but does for the actual value, so they will never be equal.

Ruby also does not comply this rule:

the result is compared with smart algorithm, so you don't have to worry about additional space characters that's not visible.

NO WAY BRO

In a certain way, because of the fact there is an anti-cheat when testing, we can understand this kata like "try to find a clever way to not be stopped by anti-cheat. I told myself that if anti is not blocking me, i'm allowed to do it.

objects in js are dictionaries, and functions are objects theirselves, so you can call any function that is part of an object with a dictionary key.

roflmao, that's cheating xddd

The most brilliant circumvention of kata rules, I love it!