Been a very long time since I touched this, but it's string comparison to see if one string can be transformed into a second string only by adding, removing or swapping a single character.

With that said, we were apparently code golfing and optimizing performance just for fun, you should absolutely not take this code as a good example of well-written Ruby.

Good suggestion, my solution definitely was affected by this bug as well.

I don't think it makes sense to have before and after callbacks function differently so I chose not to do that, i.e. registering callbacks like so:

before :test_method, :before1
before :test_method, :before2
after  :test_method, :after1
after  :test_method, :after2

should call before1 -> before2 -> test_method -> after1 -> after2.

Ruby Translation

Ruby translation:

https://www.codewars.com/kumite/610d820a3c1d9d0048f5be31?sel=610d820a3c1d9d0048f5be31

Nice job! This one was fun.

Clever on the walrus operator

I would have made it a one-liner, but squaring the result was giving inconsistent issues. Saving the result to a temp variable and squaring that seems to solve it...?

Fewer characters, low score wins!

(Obviously this solution would be terrible in production.)

Ruby translation kumited:

https://www.codewars.com/kumite/5e6a5366f43e260015dbf842?sel=5e6a5366f43e260015dbf842

Ha, why though?

It works, sometimes.

EmBRACE the curly braces...

Clever, I'm not sure how it gets any faster than that.

I fixed the warnings on submission, but given this kata is 8kyu, I think the passing state is reasonable. Having the author solution length shown is also nice to shoot for.

Code here if you want to try:

require 'benchmark'

strings = []

10000.times do 
  string = Array.new(rand(500..1000)) { rand(10).to_s }.join('')
  strings << string
end

def solution1(array)
  array.each do |s|
    s.to_i.digits.sum
  end
end

def solution2(array)
  array.each do |s|
    s.chars.sum(&:to_i)
  end
end

puts Benchmark.measure{ solution1(strings) }
puts Benchmark.measure{ solution2(strings) }