While I enjoy the idea of this Kata the instructions are extremely unclear. There is a lot of considerations that need to be made to determine if a player should hit or not. This Kata does not help us outline the considerations that tell the players to hit or not to hit. Unless they are always supposed to hit until they achieve 21 but that seems kinda silly. The win conditions are also not outlined well and that causes a lot of confusion.

In its current state I would avoid this kata which is a shame cause it does seem like it could be a fun one :/ please update this!

Hey,

this one is not working when tested against random tests. The example result from random test:
Testing for 314 and "mago": expected 'That was close!' to equal 'Fire!'. However, I cannot find an issue on my own, someone please help? :)

The description of this kata is poor. It does not state fully the winning conditions. A player wins if they have BJ and the croupier does not. But what about other cases? There is no information at all what to do with other situations, for instance if noone has BJ, or the croupier has more than 21 and players less than 21. Please update.

['A', '10', '3', '4'] ['6', 'K', '8', 'A', '8', '4', 'A', 'K'] ['10', '9', 'J', '2', 'Q', '7'] ['A', 'A', '7', '7', 'K'] ['J', '7', 'Q', '5', 'Q', 'J', '3', '9', '4', 'K', 'A', '7', '5', 'K', '9', '10', 'J', '8', '6', 'J']

Similarly here. According to the random tests noone is winning. According to me, the first player has either 28 points or 18, so we go for 18 and she/he is winning. We go for 18 points (ace counting for 1) since according to the description we go always for more points. What am I missing?

Test 21: ['J', 'A'] ['K', '10'] ['10', '2', 'Q'] ['8', '2'] ['A', 'J', '10', '2', 'A', '2', 'A', '3', '5']

Why player 1 is considered a winner here? The croupier has a BJ so the players loses. What am I missing?

One does not need both min and max vars, when the arrays are sorted you just need to store the ceiling of the previously calculated interval

looks like it's not happening anymore. Poke at me on discord if you still see the problem

.

no actionnable information, closing.

no actionnable feedback, closing

Ruby 3.0 should be enabled, see this to learn how to do it

nope, it's not a wrong case.. u didn't floored the population increase

-so this year 200 children and... ONE LEG!!! were born in our city xDDDD

Ruby error on submit:

main.rb:264: dynamic constant assignment
FULL_DECK = "A 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 J Q K"...
^
main.rb:283: syntax error, unexpected end-of-input, expecting keyword_end

Regarding the one solution where all 4 hands end up with Blackjack... Why does the solution require that nobody wins? Does the game require that all 4 draw one card which puts them over 21? Otherwise the croupier would get the blackjack first and the other 3 lose theirs, right? I never play cards so I don't know all the rules.

you don't understand the current problem: as long as what you show as expected result doesn't match what I find when I use the inputs you provide, you cannot debug your code because you're obsiously not using the correct data somehow. So there is no point discussing the rules as long as this isn't sorted out first. ;)

Check that you didn't invert some inputs in the signature of the function: (p1,p2,p3,dealer,deck). If ok, post a screenshot of the output panel with the failed assertion and your logs (not your solution)