This is not the case. For example, x=2.
The action lambda x:0 results in 0,
and the action lambda x:x%2 results in 0 too

There is a trouble with python random test case -
a test should look as a tuple:

(command, number_to_operate_with, expected_result_of_operation, "explanation");

the command is in range 0..4. But in the test case we see random.randint(0,1000000)

It should be:
random.randint(0,1000000) % 5
or:
random.randint(0,4)

Thank you ))

There are two things.
First, the description is misleading because of a typo:

'Punctuation marks should be treated as if they are apart of the word'

should read:

'Punctuation marks should be treated as if they are a  part of the word'

not apart which may be understood as separately, but a part of word, which means together with word

The other thing is about tests. The tests should include strings with leading / trailing spaces and multiple spaces between words.

You write:
TestError: Expected: '', instead got: ' ' - expected an empty string with no characters, even a single space, and got a string of one character, space char.
It's a special case and should be dealed separately.

The test cases are completely incomplete.

To my mind,

[NaN]
[NaN, NaN] and
[undefined]

should be tested as inputs.
For now, almost all solutions fail at this data.

The Instructions say nothing about the order of blocks themselves:
for the string "abacad" - "abcd-a-a" is a solution.
And "a-a-abcd" is also. And "a-abcd-a" is.

It should be explained explicitly, how to arrange the blocks.
Now, the solutions keeping "the natural order" are implicitly accepted.

Thanks

The description (for JavaScript) says:
"Only positive integers will be passed to the function (> 0 ), no negatives or zeros"
But there are test cases WITH zeros. And what is wrong with zeros?

If you have, for example, digits: 2, 1, 0 -- the smallest number you can create is
102,
NOT 012 == 12 !
Because 0 is NOT the part of number 12, and it IS the part of number 102!

So, the description and/or the test cases should be checked and updated.

A very funny description ))

I DO think so too

Since 0! is 1 (Yes. The factorial of zero is one, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factorial), 0 is not a strong number. And 0 should be included in tests!