The proposed tests are a sample of what is submitted.

There is in the submitted version some random tests. So if it doesn't pass the first time it's not going to pass the 50th time.
I suggest you to write your code not to try to beat my tests but to answer the problem. If your solution fail, print out the arguments passed and write other unit tests to see what's wrong in your solution.

Forgive my ignorance, but when I use the given unit tests, mine is passing, but when I try to Submit it, it's failing some arbitrary tests.

Are these test outlined some place where I can actually test against them and try to figue out how my solution is failing, or is it more of a 'submit it until your code passes all tests' etc?

isDivisible() make more sense then, agree.

Accepted Haskell translation, thanks a lot

I hope Leader Position would be #3 within the day ;)

But of course I got that far doing the honour Scrooge of this site, so atone +1ing every activity of mine :D

No, jokes apart, I am well aware that I am quite FAR from being as good as most (if not all) top rankers are: I am a mere amateur, but being able to compete with skilled and talented individual gave me much, as did giving myself the goal of becoming the top ranker even if I started as the least of the underdogs (a few months ago I had to Google in order to remember how to to for loops in JS, sigh...).

But the previous version was without round brackets (or parentheses or however you call them in English), which would be anyway mandatory in defining a function, wouldn't they? And I doubt anyone who does not know about undetermined parameters already could figure it out seeing a half-made template.

Just my 0.02€ of course: the last word is of course yours here :)

@IVBakker: That's why I left the arguments in the list ;).

By the way, Haskell translation kumited.

Said from someone with Honor:7512|Leader Position:#4 ^^
Terribly sorry about that. Yes next time I would know, it was my first translation merge.

I fear that may have robbed me of about 30 honour points, but, oh, well :D! Worst case, you will have to upvote my solutions or comments 30 times to get even with karma :D

Jokes apart, next time I would first see for translations, then edit the description, as it seems to be a rather troublesome process and often it takes more than a trial to get the translation approved.

Oh, of course I would not mind forking my translation again myself, if you will ever need it again :)

Oh, right, I forgot to fix that: done, thanks :)

JS initial solution isn't even a function. The initial solution should at least have the correct syntax, e.g.

function isDivisible(){
  // write your code here
}

I had to fork because I re-wrote the description -.-
Thanks a lot!

Coding is like driving, don't code and drink, that's dangerous.
I re-wrote the description, if it was really necessary.

On first glance I figured "a number n" wasn't a specific n (as in "a number, n" or "the number n") but any of the given numbers. You'd ensure they all individually resolve with their respective "other" numbers.

It's definitely not something someone should get stuck on, but it confused at least one other person for a moment as well.

And so I happened to stumble across this little good kata just before going to bed, to fall captivated by it, to complete it and while at it, to translate it into both Ruby and Python, still in case you may consider adding my work to your own here too :)

I may be seeing things as I start to feel sleepy, but I think I saw a familiar kind of code for testing it all. And it was a nice reading :)

Well, thanks for this one too :)

Seems pretty clear to me ("check if a number n is divisible by all OTHERS numbers", then you get examples down below): any suggestion to improve it or idea about where the ambigous parts are :)?