• ###### Capocacciaresolved an issue on "Mutate My Strings" kata

I dont agree. The example explains pretty clearly how the output is formed. Part of it being a "codewar" is that you have to think to figure out how to get the expected result.

Your "Issue" is just an opinion. There is no issue with the code. Its has been completed almost 500 times. I disagree as do the stats that there is an "issue" with the description in this Kata.

• ###### Capocacciaresolved an issue on "Mutate My Strings" kata

I dont agree. The example explains pretty clearly how the output is formed. Part of it being a "codewar" is that you have to think to figure out how to get the expected result.

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Build a square" kata

It does not generate the correct shape. The result of your function is the same as '+'.repeat(int)

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Build a square" kata

Description states: I expect a 3x3 square back just like below as a string.

• ###### Capocacciaresolved an issue on "Build a square" kata

This is not an issue with how the code is performing.

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Mutate My Strings" kata

Part of understanding the instructions is staring at the example to figure it out. Its an exercise in thought not just an exercise in programming.

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Beginner - Lost Without a Map" javascript solution

This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Beginner - Lost Without a Map" javascript solution

This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Summy" javascript solution

strArr is an array when you split stringOfInts so the placement of the integers into the new array sumNums is redundent and is an extra for loop that does not need to occur.

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Valid Parentheses" kata

This is how. Your examples in the Kata are as follows:

"()" => true //# of open and closed parens ==
")(()))" => false //# of closed parens > # of open parens
"(" => false //# of closed parens !== # of open parens
"(())((()())())" => true //# of open and closed parens ==

Here is an example of a failed submission:

())( => false //# of open and closed parens are ===

There is no example of the tests being order dependent just that there are an equal number of open and closed parens.

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Monkey Talk" javascript solution

Im going to add in a random work generator so people wont be able to do this in the future.

• ###### Capocacciaresolved a suggestion on "Monkey Talk" kata

Well the intention there is to show all of the possible cases that the future random tests will expect as answers. What would you suggest I do differently to make them less redundant?

• ###### Capocacciacommented on "Monkey Talk" kata

It has been updated.

• ###### Capocacciaresolved a question on "Monkey Talk" kata

Currently yes but its easily modified to be removed if you feel that is confusing.