• ###### Voileresolved an issue on "Mr. White" kata

This looks fixed

• ###### monadiuscommented on "Mr. White" kata

I prefer to make all rules consistent and remove the special rule for 0.

• ###### Kacarottcommented on "Mr. White" kata

Should the 'special rule' be removed, and the description/reference solution fixed? Or should the special rule be mentioned in the description properly?

• ###### monadiuscreated an issue for "Mr. White" kata

The reference solution cannot solve some cases. For example, the case `[1, 2, 2, 1, 2, 4, 0, 1, 4], w = 3, l = 3` has the following solution: `['M', 'H', 'M', 'H', 'M', 'M', 'H', 'H', 'M']`. But the reference solution returns `['?', '?', '?', 'H', '?', 'M', 'H', 'H', 'M']`.

• ###### monadiuscommented on "Mr. White" kata

It is a paradox if a special rule for 0 is assumed. This rule is not explained in the description (but it is hinted there). See my issue above.

• ###### monadiuscreated an issue for "Mr. White" kata

The rule for `people[i] = 0` is not explained in the description. The reference solution and all test cases assume the following rule: if `people[i] = 0` then the i-th person and all neighbors of the i-th person are innocents (`H`). This rule does not follow from the general rule "there are at least 0 monsters adjacent to me".

• ###### monadiuscreated an issue for "Mr. White" kata

Random tests sometime fail with the following message:

``````'Situation is paradoxical' should equal 'paradox'
``````

The reference solution in tests should return `'Situation is paradoxical'`.

• ###### Davidy22commented on "Common Denominators" python solution

Don't feel bad about it, most programming problems you'll face in the world won't be solvable with a clean standard library import

• ###### Kacarottcommented on "Mr. White" kata

Is it simply not tested? Or how does your solution handle paradoxes (I don't quite understand how a situation can be a paradox at all.)

• ###### Mercy Madmaskcommented on "Mr. White" kata

This is indeed not a paradox, just tested with my solution and it gives what you found.

• ###### Kacarottcreated a question for "Mr. White" kata

I am confused by the 'paradoxical' situation that you mention. I cannot see how the people represented by `1` are not monsters.

The input is `[0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0]` (From description). Which, in a square, looks like:

``````000
101
000
``````

Now, since `at least 0` must always be true, we can infer that all `0`s are human:

``````HHH
1H1
HHH
``````

And now, since we know all surrounding people are Human, the `At least 1`s must definitely be lies -> Monsters.

``````HHH
MHM
HHH
``````

Where is the paradox? Am I missing something??

• ###### AlisaIsStillGodlycommented on "Mr. White" kata

It's been two weeks at this point... I wonder if there is something wrong?

• ###### LogicalXcommented on "Gravity Flip (3D version)" kata

You sure? Test cases use deepcopy to prevent that

• ###### AlisaIsStillGodlycommented on "Gravity Flip (3D version)" kata

users can mutate inputs in python. At first my solution did not work because of that.

• ###### AlisaIsStillGodlycommented on "Hangman!" kata

nice easy problem