@FArekksu apolagies for delay on approval. I was in China and North Korea and also changed phones so basically internet was not happening....

Thanks for making the translation. Been learning python lately so keen to give it a go =]

Okay sorted.

Also removed the '&' as a '+' as was a bit pointless. Might remove all the stuff aobut route path and just call it string calculator... but wold like to post info somewhere about how to turn it into an working calculator in your browser as think it would be fun for people to break out of just algorithms and have something work for real. Meh in time

Solved it my end but was thinking that actually adding another level of complexity isn't really needed and just makes it a step closer to the other harder calculator you mentioned below.

If you consider this a precursor to that one it makes sense that it stays a bit easier. I still think it's at least a level 5 maybe level 4 or 3 as it is.

So can I class this as resolved or is there anything else I should do to extend the testing?

ha I literally just woke myself up from a completely irrelevant dream wih a flash of blinding light, I was like 'shiiiiit, I know exactly what he means!' but you beat me to it with the explanation, I was definitely being stupid, thats so obvious now. cheers brother

I'm sorry but I'm not sure where this is occuring. I don't think there should be any splits to just a zero from the tests. (I didn't include a zero digit in the random tests which is a crude/effective prevention of this)

Or are you trying to explain something else and I'm being stupid? Maybe do you mean when I'm runnning a split for an operator when it isn't there?

I have marginally improved the testing for invalid syntax but need my function itself to check for inputs like double operators or an operator at the start/end of the function first before I can randomly test for it

thanks buddy!

okay sorted the string tests issues...

Not at all . It's best to be accurate...

Yea i still don't test for double use of an operator e.g. 5--8 or an operator as the first or last element given in the string.
By unary minuses do you mean something like '8*-8'? because that isn't handled either for now.
Will add to the explanation when codewars lets me!

Yea codewars is being wierd. When i first made the test they were strings but i changed it to numbers before i even published it. looking at the tests today everything has reverted by to my first original draft which makes no sense....
I am trying to upload improved tests now but it keeps crashing =[

Thanks Johan! Now I know for next time cheers

Thanks Matt! WAsn't sure how to do that so was going to research it today =]

Thanks brother.
I changed it to actually requiring capitals so i think your solution needs ot be revised. Sorry for being a pian.

sorry that was super retarded. i was going to leave it as easy as possible and not include the forced caps part but apparently what i said and what i did came out backwards. Sorted to amend tests so it just goes with the description. thanks a lot