I benchmarked it and found it to be at least twice as slow as the ternary implemenatation. It looks nice though.

It's a question of what's more idiomatic. See Avdi Grimm's master work: Confident Ruby

The description specifies: "Input will always be a non-negative integer."

Don't think this solution is correct: when n and m are both negative, this solution will give you the positive result, when 0 should be returned.

relevant: https://xkcd.com/1445/

Your algorithm is too slow. Could be that time needed to perform your algorithm is too much and the request is dropped. Try to find another solution.

Now, what takes longer: getting the maximum value from an array, or using a ternary?

Hi,

Should the first code snippet in the Ruby version not be translated into Ruby?

Thanks

Thanks! Adding right now.

I'm currently trying to work on the Ruby version. Can you please confirm if it's possible to solve at this point?
I've tried just adding "rand(2**length)" as the return value of the 'run' method and I get a "`run': wrong number of arguments (4 for 5) (ArgumentError)" error. If I remove the last argument (iterations) from the 'run' method definition, it gets as far as failing the actual tests (no ArgumentError).