Kata

Do you import np correctly ?

Yes, of course. I omitted that but i did as follows: import numpy as np

First of all thanks for you explanation. Anyway i'm using the same exact code in VSC and it works, and also, in the task explanation it is written "fill a two-dimensional list (or array)", thus, i expect eather array or list would be ok to use.

I'll keep trying with different approach though.

Since descriptions for kata are shared by all languages, you sometimes get sitations like this. What is called a list in python is called an array in other languages. If you see something asking for an array, 99% of the time it will be referring to a list in python.

Thanks!

I added it. Everything seems to test fine, but when I try to publish, the message “Kumite published with failed tests” appears. Not sure what the issue is (I'm not very familiar with JavaScript testing).

I can't find your fork, so I really don't know where tests are going wrong.

I published a fork that should solve this.

One way is to look for a formula that, given i and j, returns the value in the array at position i,j. In row r, the elements increase from 1 to r in the first r columns, remain at r until column r from the end, and then decrease to 1. By comparing the row and column value appropriately, you can figure out what the array element has to be.

you work indivudally and don't use chatGPT and you're the best coder in the world bro

Agreed.

Thanks for the translation! It'll take me a few days before I can take a look - I'm a college professor, and Fall semester classes have just started, which is always a very busy time. Also, I'm not familiar with Rust at all.

I approved it. I like the terse style.

One very minor suggestion: in (0..m).map(|i| *[i+1, ...],

make the spacing around * consistent, either (0..m).map(|i|*[i+1, ...] or (0..m).map(|i| * [i+1, ...]

I love functional Rust :)

The asterisk is the symbol / operator to dereference the result of ...min().unwrap(), I always saw it stuck to the variable it dereferences, and there is usually always a space between the |...| holding the variables of the closure and the rest of the code, so I would not add nor remove a space here.

Makes sense - thanks.

The naming of the arguments was discussed when the kata was first approved, and I have tried to be consistent in the translations since then. @hobovsky, are you suggesting that only the C# version should be changed, or does your suggestion apply to other languages as well?

I mean, it can be just a language thing and feel free to ignore my remark if I happen just to be English-stupid. It's just that I had real problems determining from the description what dimension of the box is width, and which is length, because I have no clear understanding what would be a length of a 2D rectangular shape. The description and submission tests seem to use height and not length.

Maybe the fact that most languages uses a row-major definition of a 2D array, and the fact that the outer array of rows has some length, is enough. Although I am not sure if this works for 2D arrays in C#, because there is no outer array which would have a length.

I am not a native English speaker, so I have no good proposal how to clear things up. I will be fine if you just declare this a user problem and dismiss the suggestion. I just wanted to let you know that the length thing actually confused me to the point of checking sample tests, because I could not figure out the requirement just by reading the description. width and height would be clearer to me because that's how I am used to think about matrices and other kinds of "rectangular sets of numbers", like images etc.

Would it make it easier to grok if it said "given c (number of columns) and r (number of rows) .." - I usually find it easier to talk about R and C when discussing 2D structures. I didn't have any problems understanding this kata's instruction but it was mainly the samples that I used to understand it rather than the description ("first and last row and column" isn't the clearest way of describing the 4 options of "first row", "last row", "first column", "last column" options, I think)

I renamed the parameters in the initial C# solution to m and n, as in the description. I think this is one of those cases where single letter variable names might be preferable. And I modified the error messages to refer to width and height, rather than length. Hopefully this will clarify things.

But why is this a kata issue? Did you find a bug in the kata? What bug is this?

Can you give an example of a test case that comes up false?

@GareBearino, I can't really investigate the issue unless I have more information, like a test case where you think the result is wrong. Otherwise I need to mark the issue as resolved.

It was my first attempt at authoring, so I might have underestimated the difficulty!

Beta testers deemed it 7kyu aswel. It does seem a correct assessment of the difficulty of this task.

yeah that's fair enough, I've certainly done much easier 6kyus though. And I guess it's all relative anyhow, I found this one probably more difficult than I should have.

Are you referring to the function name create_box, or to the examples of return values? I changed the description to not show an explicit function name, although I'm not sure that that's clearer. More specifics concerning what you would like to see would be helpful, thanks!

Maybe you can replace the word input with given m = ..., n = .... Would be clearer I'll say

The first parameter is width and the second length. But it looks like you have that in your code. Is your solution passing or failing the tests?

Done.

I couldn't think of a good name (and I did put 'spiral' in quotes :-)). When you make n a little larger it sort of spirals into the middle, maybe.

Maybe Russian dolls :) is more appropriate

onion layers

Funnel. Gravity well. Square based pyramid contour lines. Journey to the centre of the square earth, that is flat, and stands on the back of 4 elephants atop a star turtle :)

I added the meaning of m and n in the description to avoid similar headaches for future solvers. Changing the order of arguments is no longer a viable option after approval. Ok for you?

I fixed the issue, and added diagnostic messages for errors. But it doesn't allow me to re-publish, so what do I do now?

You can only republish once all issues have been solved.

So is the author supposed to set the issue as resolved, or the reviewer?

Usually the author, or a user with the "resolve comments" privalage.

It wasn't clear to me how to create true random tests without using the reference solution.

(Scratch that - it just occurred to me. I'll do it once I get time.)

It wasn't clear to me how to create true random tests without using the reference solution.

The "reference solution" isn't actually one; it's just a lookup table.

Not sure where you took the code from, but it probably comes from very old katas, and they did not do random tests properly. Newer katas usually have proper random tests.

I was trying to follow the "Example test suite" in https://docs.codewars.com/languages/python/authoring/#imports . Should I do something different?

I fixed the issue, and added diagnostic messages for errors. But it doesn't allow me to re-publish, so what do I do now?

Would it be worth creating this one as an easier version (since it doesn't have the length restriction) and then pointing people to the harder one?

If this gets a JS translation, surely it would get spoilers for the other one. So I think it can be approved, but without a JS version, just make sure to link to the other kata.