I did use a slightly modified version of your solution before, but now I use yours on the Random Tests.

Any update to this? If you want, you can check my solution on kata's discourse section to see how to avoid having to deal with modulo issues.

It's still incorrect. You're still mixing and matching % and mod.

array = 
[21, -2, 4, -42, -5, 41, 23, 3, 19, 19, -4, -29, -17, -1, 42, 50, -28, 33, -48, -22, 33, 44, 11, 31, -17, 11] ==> 
expected: <
[3, -2, 4, -42, -5, 11, 11, 19, 19, 21, -4, -29, -17, -1, 42, 50, -28, 23, -48, -22, 31, 44, 33, 33, -17, 41]>
but was: <
[-29, -2, 4, -42, -17, -17, -5, -1, 3, 11, -4, 11, 19, 19, 42, 50, -28, 21, -48, -22, 23, 44, 31, 33, 33, 41]>

Rejected due to:

• No sample tests

• No random tests

• Description being language-specific

• Initial solution setup is missing return type

• The framework for writing custom tests is to use JUnit's assertions

Missed that. Fixed ✅

Array length should be randomized and not fixed to 30

I've tried to make the good proposal by josdem a little bit more Kotlin idiomatic and added a generator for testCases, so that we can check solutions against 200 randomly generated list of integers

Rejected due to

• No sample tests

• No random tests

• Only 1 test

• Description MC

• return "" instead of return array.toString() ???

• OP seems to be experimenting this translation as kumite rather than attempting to translate

• No random tests in Test cases
• No Sample Test Cases

Good translation :)

I think there need to be more test cases though; and also the sample test cases need to be adapted.