/workspace/node/test.js:7
import { expect, test } from 'vitest';
^^^^^^

SyntaxError: Cannot use import statement outside a module
    at Object.compileFunction (node:vm:360:18)
    at wrapSafe (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:1088:15)
    at Module._compile (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:1123:27)
    at Module._extensions..js (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:1213:10)
    at Module.load (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:1037:32)
    at Module._load (node:internal/modules/cjs/loader:878:12)
    at ModuleWrap.<anonymous> (node:internal/modules/esm/translators:169:29)
    at ModuleJob.run (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:193:25)
    at async Promise.all (index 0)
    at async ESMLoader.import (node:internal/modules/esm/loader:530:24)
    at async importModuleDynamicallyWrapper (node:internal/vm/module:438:15)
    at async formattedImport (/workspace/node/node_modules/.pnpm/mocha@10.2.0/node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js:9:14)
    at async exports.requireOrImport (/workspace/node/node_modules/.pnpm/mocha@10.2.0/node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js:42:28)
    at async exports.loadFilesAsync (/workspace/node/node_modules/.pnpm/mocha@10.2.0/node_modules/mocha/lib/nodejs/esm-utils.js:100:20)
    at async singleRun (/workspace/node/node_modules/.pnpm/mocha@10.2.0/node_modules/mocha/lib/cli/run-helpers.js:125:3)
    at async exports.handler (/workspace/node/node_modules/.pnpm/mocha@10.2.0/node_modules/mocha/lib/cli/run.js:370:5)

I'm not going get into a flame war right now, but generally speaking, closing issues that are not fixed is frowned upon.

As for the duplicate, here is just one example of another kata outside of beta that's done this task before, and decyrption is trivial in this case.

Generally speaking, codewars beta isn't a great platform for coding schools to use for projects or assignments.

• needs random tests
• while the story is novel, the concept of conditional logic isn't new enough or exciting enough for this kata to likely ever exit beta

• needs random tests
• very likely a duplicate of many of the other caesar shift katas outside of beta

Liked this one a lot, great job (again ;P).

ha! muscle memory ;P

good question. My authoring days are likely over so I'm not really an authority on this one, but I think either one would be fine. Codegolf tends to do well when there are a few ways to solve and not a single prescribed method. I don't know if that's going to be the case here. Flip a coin maybe? ;P

realistically the performance kata's get fewer completions (compared to their non-performance counterparts) and hence, by my own observation, remain in beta. I honestly don't know what the best approach is here. The other kata appears to be fairly well received too.

^agreed about the performance constraints right now.

Couple things to consider.

• this definitely needs a performance tag
• there's already a beta kata about Pisano Period (https://www.codewars.com/kata/5f1360c4bc96870019803ae2)

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/workspace/default/.venv/lib/python3.11/site-packages/codewars_test/test_framework.py", line 112, in wrapper
    func()
  File "/workspace/default/tests.py", line 207, in __
    test.expect(len(sol_code)<=200, f"Code is too long, length of code: {len(sol_code)} which is greater than {limit} by {len(sol_code)-200} characters")
                                                                                                               ^^^^^
NameError: name 'limit' is not defined

Unfortunately this kata has been done before and therefore makes this a duplicate https://www.codewars.com/kata/city-swim-2d-towerflood-and-plainflood

Probablity isn't my strong suit, but the description seems a bit confusing to me.

The function returns True if the player should roll again (when the probability of scoring is above their acceptable threshold), and False otherwise (when the probability of getting any points is below their threshold level of risk).

roll_again(1, 0.50) -> True # Explanation: With one die, the chance of scoring (1 or 5) is 1/3, which is below a 50% threshold, suggesting a roll again.

Based on the description it should return False, no?

Nice one as usual. I'm really not happy with my spaghetti code though XD

A few problems:

• it's a duplicate
• it needs random tests
• the initial code setup uses the wrong function name