Ok Karen.

You know, the Olympic Rulebook for the 100m dash don't state you aren't allowed to strap on a jetpack. However, in a real world environment, when you are professionally sprinting around town, you're going to lean on advanced technologies like that. So really, I wouldn't consider it cheating if the Olympic Rulebook doesn't mention that ahead of time.

I agree. In a real world environment, you're going to lean on language libraries like java.math to handle it for you. The description needs to state that you shouldn't use those. I wouldn't consider leveraging language libraries like that cheating if it isn't in the description ahead of time.

There are no tests in this task

Hey, I really think that you should mention that strings are not the standard way of representing bigintegers, and to speed your code up, you should use an array of unsigned longs instead. I fell too deep into the string bigint rabbit hole before I realised myself.

Hello. I am try solve this kata in C language. Fixed tests passed, but random tests throw "Test Crashed Caught unexpected signal: 6". Help me please.
PS: Sorry for mistakes in my question, I am badly know English...

Would this really be 4kyu if you could use BigInt ??

honestly too easy for a 4 kyu.

The description states that "The numbers are positives" so this would be an invalid input. Actually the Java random tests have an issue as they could produce zeros by a very rare chance.

That's why it's disabled. Not a kata issue. See my suggestion below.

JS engine here does not seem to support BigInt (which would make the solution trivial)

Probably test like: "assertEquals("0", Kata.add("0", "0"));" should be added. Some java solutions return empty string with "0"+"0" and pass all the existing tests.

the kata is too easy for 4kyu, it's approximately has 6 kyu.

Hello everyone I ran into a problem: when using the BigInt function in an online compiler, it works calmly, then the codewars compiler gives the error BigInt is not defined

If the kata has further requirements (i.e. anti-cheat) this should be stated in the description

Great solution! I like how you only need to use the reverse method once, so it makes it faster than the 2nd popular option.