Thanks! :)

This is a really nice kata!

thank you! :)

I really felt like this was sort of a gross mess to write....but pivot tables are usually a gross mess to create in most cases, so good job on actually hitting this one right on! :D

If I remember correctly, it started as poor practice because, while various systems processed it fine, it potentially led to some tricky reference situations. As far as I'm aware this is pretty well mitigated now by smarter backend processing in pretty much every system, particularly Postgres, so it is sort of a moot thing. Could also just be me being nitpicky because that's how I learned?

I'll try to come up with a fix for the time format issue. The column name bad practice may be held as bad practice by some, maybe amoungst hardcore DBA's IDK. To me though that makes little sense, considering that if you just do count(*) without a column name it actually uses "count" as the default name. If the default name is considered bad practice then why is it the default? Besides that, sometimes you just want your report to say the most clear thing, and "count" is the most clear without being overly verbose.

Good point, I didn't think to use the ::date type. That test is actually auto generated. I'll have to figure out how I can try to support both so that all of the old solutions don't get invalidated.