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.
Log
'a'
... last argument - Expected: 'b', instead got: 'a'
what's wrong? The input log is 'a', and the expected output is 'b'?
Java Translation
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
Lua translation!
Please, add to instruction of this kata: "Should do more perfomance solution".
I wrote first alhorithm on JavaScript and got timeout. I do more optimization, but got timeout again at N=10. Then put to trash old code and make new faster up to 1000% alhorithm. He has also exponential time from N, but it pass all test.
C translation
(author is gone)
First kata to
#include <sqlite3.h>
:pThe requirements that methods ought to be non-configurable and that
.delete()
"should have the same return values as thedelete
builtin" are senseless.It adds nothing to the task and it prevents more modern code using classes to be used, since class methods are configurable. Moreover, the return value of the
delete
operator is mostly useless anyways (deleting a property that does not exist yieldstrue
...) and depends on whether you are in strict mode or not.These requirements should be dropped.
C Translation (author inactive).
python:
Why do I get the error: "Value is not what was expected"
I will write as a person who solved this problem without creating a new list, English is not my first language, but it seems to me that the condition needs to be changed, since the list of functions is not clear in advance. The whole kata is quite interesting (especially if you solve it without a new array :)) but it seems to me rather ridiculous to exclude list() leaving [] they do not affect the performance of the code in any way and are essentially a matter of taste.
Two Go tests are not written correctly when they have already changed
code limit can be enforced to avoid solutions like this .. any suggesstions ?
python new test framework + random tests. updated in this fork
In PHP the second test includes 0.0 in its values:
$this->assertSame([9,9,1,2,1,1,3,1,9,9,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0], moveZeros([9,0.0,0,9,1,2,0,1,0,1,0.0,3,0,1,9,0,0,0,0,9]));
the digit 0.0 are counted as a zero but expected to be a single zero after moving to the end. All tests will pass if a single 0 is added to the end for any digit that evaluats as 0 (including 0.0).
C#: method name should be
PascalCase
(Please refer to implementation of backward compatibility here )Loading more items...