Super clever!

Contrary to other posters, I believe this is best practice and best performance. the Min Max implementations are vectorized, making them faster than the typical for loop by an order of magnitude. Even considering the double iteration. this will depend on the hardware.

@hiyosilver - did you benchmark your code? I did, and the "naive" Min/Max solution is indeed faster. C# vectorizes the search, which makes it an order of magnitude faster than a linear search with a for loop, according to my benchmark.

yoo so did i

I can´t beleave this kata has this short solution. You are awesome.

nice

not the best solution and not very clever.

• Dont define methods in one line, as it is not very readable
• Use spaces between operators (+) and parameters to make the code more readable
• Using a variable like sum for the result of the addition makes the code more self explenatory

I was afraid that there would be phrases like "TREE FIDDY" or "THREE FIFTY", and wrote unnecessary command s.toLowerCase().

Did the exact same program, only the variable 'f' was 'name' in mine. Congrats to all who finished it :D

I have the same issue with random tests (Golang, wrong order)

report

What does this even mean ?

I dont know what you did there.. but i will try it

this one excels