if modifying non-linq data were a problem, would the specialists at ms put so much effort into making it possible?

this seems very O(n) to me. I think we should be doing this in O(logn)

Can someone explain how the predicate works? The linq where query takes the array values one at a time and increments each keys value until that value is less than x?

Thanks for showing me a new syntax! Much cleaner than building the dictionary inside the where clause, and probably about the same performance.

Very nice solution

The char datatype can be treated as its unicode equivalent without typecasting or converting. So it's is evaluating the chars based on their unicode equivalents. If you're not familiar with Unicode you definetly need to research it.

coding requires small knowledge of math, even if u don't want to be a graphics engineer

Wait im confused, this probably a dumb question but where do you access the alphabet in this?

1. Why should i learn math while learning coding? Spent a lot of time to understand the task
2. Even with fully understanding what i should to do i spent a lot of time for algorithm realization. Difficulty of the kata equal to 5 IMO

Poor description and wrong difficulty - not fun at all

Unless the instruction "Try not to cheat and provide a recursive solution" should be read as an instruction to provide a recursive solution ... I read it as stating that providing a recusive solution is cheating (though don't see why it should be)

Why shouldn't they? The solution works, and is not recursive.

Try not to cheat and provide a recursive solution

Why ppl upvote this solution?

This is the best solution in my opionion so far. Just split up the distinct values in a dictionary within a single line and use this one to count the apperance. Nice one!

wait... is this works?! magic!