added

Make sure the average is rounded down if it's less than 5.5. The problem statement doesn't say that. But for me, this is what the random tests were complaining about.

For the Kotlin solution, the random tests require that the average be rounded down if it's it's less than 5.5 or rounded up if it's 5.5 and up.

Please add this tidbit to the problem statement.

There is a site called interviewing.io (there, you can do a technical interview anonymously over a shared code editor and shared audio, and uncover you name at the end of the interview if you wish). Another site is called triplebyte (It's an agency. If you pass their online tests, they'll make you skip screening interviews at tech companies). And then, there is pramp.com (that site allows you to do mock tech interviews with other job hunters over video and over a shared code editor. Others interview you. And you interview them. The site provides the questions and the answers. It's a great way to get a feel for the competence of the people you might be competing with).

But otherwise, I agree with Lise. Nothing actually beats applying for jobs and seeing what happens.

"For 37, we take numbers in groups of threes from the right and..." should be "For 37, we take numbers in groups of three digits from the right and..."

In my opinion, the new wording would make it clearer that we're talking about groups of digits.

In your last case.

CheckIntermediateValues(35,5,6,1) is indeed 35, not 36.

Just do it manually: 5 * (6 + 1) = 35

same solution :p

Java test cases still have wrong syntax.

Use

  assertEquals("undefined",s.slope(new int[] {-7,2,-7,4}));
  assertEquals("5",s.slope(new int[] {10,50,30,150}));
  assertEquals("-5",s.slope(new int[] {15,45,12,60}));
  assertEquals("6",s.slope(new int[] {10,20,20,80}));
  assertEquals("undefined",s.slope(new int[] {-10,6,-10,3}));

these issues were fixed a long time ago.
Apologies for the late reply

Instead of doing "result = i + result" you can type "result += i;" this will take "result" and add "i" to it then store the output back into result

Fixed about a week ago.

If in Java, did you forget to

import java.lang.Math;

In any case, implementing your own max and min using >= or <= inside a loop shouldn't be too difficult.

Yes, the method name should start with a lower case, and there could be more test cases in the public part of the test cases, instead of putting most of those test cases in the submission part, but aside from that, that java problem worked for me.

PS: I did not write the java test cases, nor the Kata. This is just my opinion as a third party who passed the java test cases.

Start your loop at 0 instead of 1. And voila, you'll pass that test.

it was static instead of class before