Loading collection data...
Collections are a way for you to organize kata so that you can create your own training routines. Every collection you create is public and automatically sharable with other warriors. After you have added a few kata to a collection you and others can train on the kata contained within the collection.
Get started now by creating a new collection.
Fixed.
The random tests were too bad. Now your solution (and it seems around 50% of previously submitted ones) got invalidated.
And of course the tests were correct, and they were testing the right thing.
Why do you think so?
It is stated that these are arbitrary integers
I use many trials so the chance of false positives is small. If you can pass the test case by implementing a normal dice for example, the whole kata is broken.
With 1k trials like you suggest using 98%, it means a range of 190-250:
Using 100k trials, a normal dice will practically never end up in that range. A dice with 20% also has super small probability of ending up the range chosen.
Marking this issue resolved until you recommend some better alternatives to the points you made.
There is one (large) test case so this is false. If you mean there are no example test cases, it is clearly stated and the reason for that is becuase there is only test case...
There is no good way to test a probabilistic kata like this with 100% garantuee that does not exclude some valid solutions, that I am aware of. A 2% false negative is a good compromize that allows many solutions (it does not check solutions, just outcomes). Please recommend another approach or method for testing if you are unhappy with this one.
I'm happy to change my kata for the better, but unless you spesifically recommend something else and convince me why it is better I will mark this issue as resolved.
The reason is to disable the use of mutiplication functions already defined for ints. In my first version, I thought I could trust a honor system and people would not use such functions, but then I got a lot of comments that I need to forcefully ensure that no one could invoke those functions. The solution should not be overly complicated; the only difference should be the use of
oneandzeroinstead of 1 and 0.sounds like a codewars issue, i guess all you can do is refresh the page and try again or just wait