I tested functional programming vs a for loop and it seems like the for loop can be about 100ms faster than the functional programming approach. Not too sure why

Agreed, I remember reading that somewhere -- but why? because of the lambda function, right?

Actually not the best practice. List comprehension would be more fitting

Awesome use of tap and flatten! I didn't know Array had an "each_with_index" function! Thanks!

Thanks!
Oops, I failed a random test now!
:)

Best

Oh, no! Oh, my god!

Fixed, I keep forgetting about the differences in Ruby's vs. Python's shuffle.

Thanks, man :)

All of my random tests in Ruby were Jonathon Joestar, is this expected?

The random tests appear to be incorrect. We are instructed that page -1 should return -1 for out of bounds requests.

Testing .page_item_count() method for 14 elements, 3 elements per page, page number -1
It should work for random tests too: -1 should equal 3