While there is no performance, the input constraints are mentioned in description. With 10^5 input, the expected time complexity should be less than O(n^2). Your code looks to have O(n^2) because of operations like .splice or .indexOf nested in a loop.

However, there was an issue raised about it below and seemingly O(n^2) should be accepted now? Maybe there are some inconsistencies between tests of different languages, that's up to the author to clarify.

It looks like you're using https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Nullish_coalescing which is only available since node 14. Are you sure that you have node 18 selected at the top?

It looks like you're not returning any value. Printing is for your own debugging.

I hate to break it to you, but the "1665 of 6975 completions" thing means that 1665 users completed it out of all 6975 completions in your selected language (which appears to be JS). It's true though that g964 kata descriptions aren't great.

Have you checked authoring guidelines? https://docs.codewars.com/authoring/guidelines

No random tests.

No sample tests.

I'm not saying you're wrong in trying to "revive" the issue, but you have to be careful. I think it would be acceptable to close previous issues, if you could summarize them well in your own issue (and keeping it at the top).

I'm guessing you don't have the rights to close older issues, so you'd probably have to consult about this on CW Discord server.

At the end of the day, it should be up to the translator or the author to get this fixed, but neither seem to care too much about it, leaving us in a rough spot. And there really aren't that many active Clojure users willing to fix stuff like this :/

No, that's not how it works. You don't open the same issue twice (more than that in this case), until the old one gets resolved. You can provide the same information in older posts too.

Also, what context? You just posted some stack trace, without any context at all! (other than it's about Clojure) Much of this information was already provided in previous issues, proving this one as redundant.

Hello there. Would you be able to revise your Clojure translation, as there are multiple issues about it implying it's broken? Thanks.

There are already 2 open issues about this, including one from 7-8 years ago. Why do you think it's neccessary to raise another one?

Maybe, if you're trying it in BF.

Thank you very much for such detailed explanation!

I'm referring to the post by @pa-m, which is clearly an issue. Your mentioned post is about the Rust version. Just because it still hasn't been fixed, doesn't mean you should duplicate the issue.

You can comment on the existing one or upvote it. Even more effective method is to reply to the post that published the translation, which notifies the translator. Another option is to post about the issue on CW Discord server, and pinging the translator if they're available there.