it may be a bit redundant to make the Human class abstract here, since there are no methods or attributes inherrited by man or woman, so theres no common behavior to impliment

Haskell kumited.

Click reset, I had already fixed it some hours ago.

Java. Argument order in sample tests is wrong again. I've left the explanation in author's fork in case he decides to fix it himself.

NASM translation ready.

You're right. I think I just misunderstood final tests or my coffee wasn't strong enough this morning. Anyways, sorry for wasting your time.

In your suggestion you were talking nonsense. And now you're talking nonsense as well. How on earth did you get 0 * 2 = 30???

It's been rejected by the kata's author.

In my suggestion I explained algorithm, not it's implementation. I don't care about actual output and what you're going to check in final tests.

Currently for input father's age = 30, son's age = 0 correct answer is 0.
In my suggestion correct answer would be 30 (father will be 60 when his son will be 30). In my second example I explained case "from the past" - currently father is 53 and son is 27, but a year ago father was twice as old as his son.

Invalidating solutions is not a problem, users do not lose honor because of this, but rewriting a kata to change output format? Lol, good luck finding a user who's gonna waste their time on such a worthless idea.

Both father and son are aging simultaneously - that's why I thought it would be better to consider it in this kata

It may sound surprising to you, but if the user does not address this fact, (s)he won't be able to solve the kata.

And you're not suggesting to "consider the fact they're aging", you're asking to change the output from integer to string, which only makes this kata harder because you have to output the correct string i.e. consider the singular/plural use of word "year(s)" and choose the correct tense for the message (Past Simple, Future Simple). This would be harder than finding the answer itself, you know?

that's coming from your own code: in /home/codewarrior/run.php on line 4, so not an issue.

• Issue: problem in the kata itself (description, wrong tests, wrong internal solution...)
• Suggestions: well, I guess that part is clear
• Question anything else that is related to you having a problem solving a kata.

When you post issues:

• provide ALL the useful information:
  • language
  • input
  • outputs (actual expected) when relevant
  • error message when relevant
• check, DOUBLE check that this IS an issue, meaning that the problem is in the kata itself and not in your code. If it's in your code, post rather a question
• if you pass this step, you still have to prove/explain what the issue is (and if you can provide fixes, it's even better)

cheers

ah... then you can reject my fork of the java version, plz x)

https://www.codewars.com/kumite/5b86aab1ced43c8e7e00004f?sel=5b87eb89ced43c368b000183

Fixed.

He already explained that. You'd be invalidating a -lot- of existing, valid solutions just becuase you want a output string.

Please, explain why you think my suggestion isn't good enough. Both father and son are aging simultaneously - that's why I thought it would be better to consider it in this kata.