Loading collection data...
Collections are a way for you to organize kata so that you can create your own training routines. Every collection you create is public and automatically sharable with other warriors. After you have added a few kata to a collection you and others can train on the kata contained within the collection.
Get started now by creating a new collection.
The anticheat tests are incorrect and fail the reference solution too.
isUniversal
anticheat: This line ingenerate
Will incorrectly cause unconditional failure for some test cases. For example, if your random tests run
new FunctionalSet([D]).difference(new FunctionalSet([D]).difference(new FunctionalSet([C]))).not()
(which should, in fact, be universal).For the anticheats, the variables in the tests are scoped in a problematic way (namely
your_result
,my_result
and_it
). By scoping them outside the test loop, every singleit
block will be reading and writing to/from the same references. This is a problem because Chai sets up the fixtures way before any of theit
blocks are run. Before anyit
is run, these variables would have had their values overwritten on each loop, until they settle on the values from the final iteration. So the end result is basicallyyour_result
,my_result
and_it
having the same values on each run. Since the titles of theit
blocks are also precomputed, they do NOT match what is really being tested.The anti cheating memoization test: The functional set argument returns a string instead of a boolean. Discussed in the issue below mine by Invariance.
Something is wrong with the
Duplication exception tests
I did comment it out from my sample tests, and it allowed my solution to pass all tests.
I also, tried other users solutions, and they do not pass this test case as well.
Python new test frameworks are required.
Missing mutable test cases for
takeWhile
.This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
The kata's description is horrendously lazy. And it leaves a lot of specs out of the table, even in the context of the linked Wikipedia article:
[A-Z# ]
, but this is really because the tests are too lazy.There are no tests that validate
stop
is handled correctly. Every test can be passed by processing every character except the last (and ignoringstop
altogether).Python translation
Implemented random tests to match o2001's implementation as much as possible.
These edge cases should also be tested since they are present in example tests:
[1..9,12..15] -- invalid since one single range is allowed
[1,2..20,25] -- invalid since a range has to be the final item
[1,2,3..20] -- invalid since at most one inidivual element can be provided before a range
These edge cases should also be tested since they are present in example tests:
[1..9,12..15] -- invalid since one single range is allowed
[1,2..20,25] -- invalid since a range has to be the final item
[1,2,3..20] -- invalid since at most one inidivual element can be provided before a range
It seems a bit odd to me that
vowelSet.includes(A)
is required to throw an error when such problems are decidable (determining if a finite set is a subset of any other set). Should it really be required that the implementation fails when it doesn't have to?I'm failing exclusively on four "anti cheating memoization test"s (without cheating or using memoization), so either that test is misconfigured, or my solution is bad and some other "normal" tests (not related to cheating) are missing.
First off, thanks for putting this together, it's been a fun challenge. However, I seem to be running into an issue with my attempt. The first attempt, I passed all tests but the performance test. My second attempt, after some minor code cleanup, is now failing all of the "anti cheating" "edge case" tests, but I haven't functionally changed anything.
Any idea what the issue could be? I put a good amount of effort into my solution, so it's a bit frustrating to fail in a way that I cannot identify.
The JavaScript in the description and initial code is quite ancient.
Decorator
should be aclass
, and spread parameters should be used instead of usingFunction.prototype.call()
on thearguments
object.The
if outer observable never completes, then concatMap either
andif inner observable never completes, then concatMap either
tests are completely undecipherable.Please actually explain what are the expected behaviours of the 3 operators required to be implemented.
Loading more items...