It certainly is possible!

In fact it should yield a far less convoluted solution. Just now I updated my solution to work through ES6 classes, once you've completed the Kata please do make sure to give it a look and feedback is appreciated!

Hey jegan145,

So some resources I think you'll find really handy in order to solve this Kata would be:

• Getters > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Functions/get
• valueOf > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Object/valueOf

Also, remember that Values can only call Operators, and Operators can only call Values, meaning they can't be the same thing.

First of all, sorry for the late reply, didn't get the notification that there was a comment made on this Kata.

For that, I'll give you a hint, what you are and what you can be reduced to is not necesarily the same in Javascript, this can know how to become 0 or 2, pay close attention to the example in which the FluentCalculator is treated as a Number.

I'm sorry I couldn't get on in time to give you a hand with whatever problem you had, but, I'm glad you solved it!

Thanks for you observation! I could've sworn I had it updated. Now there it is, sorry for any inconvenience that could've caused.

Because Array.prototype.forEach checks things that I'd the user to check for himself, like making sure that the current item really belongs to the Array, or just looping for as long as the original length regardless if it was changed or whatnot in the body of the function.

Does this answer your question?

I'm really glad to read that!

Thanks :D

By

manually changing non-numeric length

I'll assume you mean something like this:

let a = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
a.length = "hello";

However this wouldn't work since Array's setter for length ensures you pass an int or a number casteable value.

I'm not quite sure I'm following what you propose.

• Enumerable numeric keys in Array.prototype (large enough so that they are not overriden in the array itself): Array.prototype['42'] = 42
• Enumerable numeric keys in Array.prototype (less than the array length but missing in the array itself): Array.prototype['3'] = 42, a = new Array(10) However, I'm not sure if the behavior in this case is standardized or implementation-defined.

Do you mean having a property in the prototype of array that should not be inside the result of filter? Test added, please check and confirm I actually handled what you proposed

Regarding the '00' one, added. Please take a look and let me know if I hit the nail on the head.

Great ideas! I added tests for falsy values instead of just for undefined.
Had to refactor my solution a bit for the second suggestion, but it sure was a good catch.

Thanks for you comments, any other idea you might have, please do let me know. :D

That's a great observation!
Test Case added!

Thanks for your comment.

Regarding the 1) Checked.

Regarding the 2) I'm sorry, I didn't update the Example Test Cases accordingly to changes I did to the Test Cases.

Please do take a look and let me know if I missed anything or if there's anything else you'd like to see changed.
Thanks for your comment!