Thank You for the feedback, appreciated. I'll pull my other contributions till I get it correct.

I read over the guidelines a few times and rereading it now. Can you tell me what is wrong/missing? I also ask because I made a few others and I don't want to waste anyone else's time if I'm doing it incorrectly.Thank You.

Great, thank you!

That weak types:)
Fixed, review please

yep, but you went even further overboard ;)

nice :) didn't think of that, hope you don't mind that I change the tests to catch it

Thanks, you used an interesting algorithm to solve it

done

.

Done. I looked that I already included the Rust description but since I started the translation last week before the Rust translation it didn't work out.

Hmmm, weird. I can't find any <<<... in the description.

@el-f Done. Increased the final test and merged the description.

Most of the runtime is JVM startup and compiling as well as Scalatest being very slow, which is why we get 16 seconds.

The actual time taken to run all the random tests (where all the actual performance goes) is about 2-2.5s including the assertions (which is a non trivial amount of overhead).

You lose from about 7-10s on startup depending on how large the test suite is.

There is still about 4s of overhead for solutions to be slower than the reference and work despite how it looks.

What I found: two lines that are very very close but don't actually intersect.

desmos:

zoomed:

I'm resolving this issue for now.
Maybe there could be a way to zoom the images to find this sort of thing.
Or I could reduce the size of rooms so it doesn't happen as often.
What do you think?