No way it's 4kyu, should be 7 or max 6 kyu

O(n^2) It doesnt look like best practices at all in this case

It's cool but it's not 4 kyu, it's much easier :(

Description is incomplete. LISTEN state should also handle RCV_SYN_ACK event.
Other than that - pretty solid typing challenge.

approved

Approved

True, did not noticed that, thank you, it worked.

your function listen() clashes with POSIX's listen(). Criterion is probably using listen() somewhere for inter-process communication and calls your function instead, leading to a crash. Rename it, and your code will pass.

I wrote my solution in C, but the test program is crashing, the problem is in the libcriterion.so, there is some way to attach the gdb on it and see what is going on?
Just in case, i wrote this simple function to verify my code locally and all sample tests are working!

void fixed_test(size_t n, enum Event events[], enum State waited_result){
	if(get_TCP_state(n, events) == waited_result){
		puts("[+] g00d [+]");
	} else {
		puts("[-] b4d [-]");
	}
}

This is the error, as i can't attach any debbuger i can't see what is in those addresses:

/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x32b87)[0x7f3d3b842b87]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x34e0a)[0x7f3d3b844e0a]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x1a34b)[0x7f3d3b82a34b]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x270fd)[0x7f3d3b8370fd]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x21cc4)[0x7f3d3b831cc4]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x193f3)[0x7f3d3b8293f3]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x176ef)[0x7f3d3b8276ef]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(+0x11e96)[0x7f3d3b821e96]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(criterion_run_all_tests+0x1d2)[0x7f3d3b8183b2]
/usr/lib/libcriterion.so.3(main+0x30)[0x7f3d3b8170f0]
/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xe7)[0x7f3d3af18c87]
./test[0x400b2a]
Invalid argument [22] (/src/criterion/build/nanomsg-build/src/nanomsg/src/aio/usock_posix.inc:353)

I think there're lots of fake users vote for this solution by best practice why ?

Lua translation!

This kata is overrated - it feels like it belongs to the 6th level (at best)
=_=

I'll say, but keep in mind that this approach is more concise and efficient than your method, especially for larger numbers.