This was a solid reminder to reread what is the required output, I wrote to output missing cones visually as a grid, just to wonder why it's asking me for a string lol.

Ah, didn't need a reminder how much I was annoyed by this problem lol.

I don't know if you've read my followup comment, I fixed the algorithm now and it's Passed: 480 Failed: 46, the 46 are all edge cases for -1 which I am yet to implement.

You are correct.

I see, but how would 114 be expected from 414? Shouldn't it be 144?

From 414, the expectected answer is 144, and not 114. I think you are still reading something wrong, but it's difficult to tell for sure without seeing your code.

there's numerous other people complaining about incorrect expectations for solutions

Most of the people do the same mistake as you: they misread test feedback and mistake expected for input, or get something else wrong. I tried to improve the messages, but it's difficult to guard against every possible mistake :)

Passed: 480 Failed: 46

Vastly improved the solution, the 46 failed are all edge cases that are supposed to return -1, guess I'll have to figure that out hm

I see, but how would 114 be expected from 414? Shouldn't it be 144? My program outputs 144, I thought the premise of the problem is the next lesser permutation consisting only of the original digits, 114 is 2 1s and a 4 from the original 414 (2 4s and a 1), and other such confusing inputs which simply seem incorrect, not to say my solution is proper nor flawless but there's numerous other people complaining about incorrect expectations for solutions, I'll keep testing but I'll definitely have to postpone this kata a bit as I am a bit annoyed by it at this point.

You are reading the logs wrong. For example, the message is:

Incorrect answer for n=414: 441 should equal 144

It means that for n=414, the expected answer is 114, and your solution returned 441. Or following one:

Incorrect answer for n=100: 10 should equal -1

For n=100, your solution returns 10, which is not really correct.
Additionally, your solution crashes for some specific types of inputs.
Your solution is buggy, it's not a kata issue.

Passed: 106 Failed: 445

A lot say it should be wrong result, or I am misunderstanding the kata, i.e:

5500 should equal -1 shouldn't 5500 equal to 5050? When I run it the output is 5050

441 should equal 144 when it should be 414 etc.

Interesting...

Fixed in Python

huh, apparently I did, I thought this was just regular discourse, mb

you did raise an issue though. don't do that, they are meant to report bugs within the kata

I never said anything about a kata issue, I just said it's interesting because I'll have to figure out a faster method.

your code being too slow is not a kata issue ;-)