.

Approved

Thank you for this translation. I will not be approving it in this form though.

You made changes to the description not just towards Rust, but away from Javascript. Adding Rust-specific things is not a problem (there is also a PHP translation outstanding which may also need a language-specific section), but everything that's in the description now is there for a reason. Please do not take things out.

The reference solution is in an imperative style. I like to program in a functional style, and I would like to have the reference solution be in a functional style.

The sanity checks are mostly gone. Maybe they just aren't applicable, but if they were taken out because 'that can never happen', that's just what they're there for: to catch things that should never happen. If you can imagine something that should never happen, please write an additional test for it and have me backport it to the JavaScript version!

The random tests are entirely gone. This is especially unacceptable.

If there is a possibility to use predefined functions as arguments, the way I use (amongst others) Math.pow, Math.max and "".repeat in JavaScript, please do so. Solvers should realise that functions are functions, regardless of syntax (JavaScript: arrow vs. function declaration) or source (user-defined or language-defined). If this situation is different in Rust, please tell me.

In general, please remain as close to the original, in form and function, as possible. There is more to this kata than just implementing zipWith; that's not really a challenge. It's also about showcasing functions and functional programming, even if only for the people who read the test cases afterwards.

If you would like help or would like me to do some of the work (not the programming part though! I speak zero Rust), not a problem. If you just publish your own zip_with kata in Rust, also not a problem.

Again, I appreciate the translation, but I would like for translations to leave the look-and-feel intact. With some work on that, I'm sure we can get to a version that I'll gladly approve.

Rust Translation added

@JohanWiltink Rust Translation added

@brassington Why add the function? Just remove all code. Making stuff compile is trivial, if there is nothing which can fail. That's why I don't think this is a good Kata.

Also, your TDD tests are still the default. Imho, you should at least give one example, like calling main and call_me successfully