Nope, sorry, I am still receiving the exact same error messages.

I see a lot of people have ran into the same issue as me : your final tests have some null parameters. The description clearly states : a function named interleave, that accepts an arbitrary number of ARRAY arguments.

You need to specify in the description how non-array parameters should be dealt with. In the case of the nulls I assumed them to be empty arrays and the code worked, but the description should have been clearer.

Otherwise a nice kata.

There's a mystery function which is already available for you to use.

You can call the mystery function

You are free to call the mystery function in your own test cases however you want.

All lies, bro. All lies.

Not that it's unsolvable. But it kinda felt like "How I Met Your Mother" : all that build-up for an anticlimactic finale.

Clicking the "Skip" button inside a kata doesn't trigger the "Unlock Solutions" popup anymore, instead it triggers some sort of infinite page load loop (you can see the tiny red loading bar at the top of the screen quickly trying and failing to load something repeatedly)

Thanks for doing that. It gave my solution a chance to work, so I could see what the other solutions looked like and finally understand what you wanted :)) In my solution I only used node.js for buffering, not converting, I did the converting the old fashioned way, therefore problems... Well, you live and you learn something new :)

A code golf, nice! I want to see more of these!

Actually no coding needed at all. Not a kata, but a static mathematical problem.

You can maybe turn it into a generalized arithmetic progression problem, which would be valid kata material.

Just more than three test cases, you know ? Something fun, like 255.255.255.255, or 127.0.0.1 :P Again, just for kicks, that's all, otherwise your kata is pretty straightforward and for this kind of algorithm a few tests are indeed enough.

Ok, I'm back. Based on what I thought I understood from your test cases (because your description still needs an overhaul, but we'll get there eventually), I rebuilt my code completely and I'm pretty confident of it. However there are still some things I can't figure out. Here is a drawing of your third test case :

http://imageshack.com/a/img911/5453/GuK6y1.png

Your test expects five triangles - which I assume are the four ones filled with yellow in the drawing and the large one. Why not the central one ? [[3, 2], [2, 1], [4, 1]] ? It's a perfectly valid triangle, indeed formed with the existing edges of other triangles but so is the large one formed; so why aren't you counting the central (white) one ?

Now this one's a challenge. Only one time this has been completed! It took me a couple of hours, a couple of rewrites and some drawing to FINALLY understand what this kata wants. And since a picture is worth a thousand words, I thought I'd post here a plot of your sixth test, maybe it'll help some people see and understand things better. And, indeed, after counting them one by one, I concur : there's 27 of them :P

http://imageshack.com/a/img908/6504/lJpkYM.png

(P.S. Just because I understand the instructions now doesn't mean I've solved it :P I'll have another crack at it tomorrow.)

Nice idea, I would have really liked to see more tests.

That was fun!

One of the worst katas I have ever had the displeasure of solving. How this got out of beta is beyond me. Kudos to the nice people in the comments section (especially LuigiBakker) who managed to decypher the creator's cryptic description.

Your seventh decoding test asks to decode a string that contains a long decimal subunitary number (example : "0.07205889071337879"). However, there is no "." character in base64.

I have no idea how you expect that case to be treated; since there is no "." character in base64, that is invalid input. (I know there are some flavors of base64 that use '.' as char 62, I've tried that, no luck.)

My code passes all the other cases and is my solution from http://www.codewars.com/kata/base64-encoding/javascript so I know it works correctly.

Given the implementation of this functions (they are preloaded and it is not necessary to implement them):

function generator(sequencer) {
   ...
}

//sequencers
function factorialSeq() {...} // 1, 1, 2, 6, 24, ...
function fibonacciSeq() {...} // 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 12, ...
function rangeSeq(start, step) {...} // rangeSeq(1, 2)  -> 1, 3, 5, 7, ...
function primeSeq() {...} // 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, ...
partialSumSeq(1, 3, 7, 2, 0) {...} // 1, 4, 11, 13, 13, end

Actually no, they are not preloaded. Any test run triggers the errors ReferenceError: rangeSeq is not defined and ReferenceError: factorialSeq is not defined and so I am unable to test or log anything. Please fix this.