closing as duplicate of this

Issues from 7 years ago aren't even solved. There's no hope our recent ones will be solved...

Ooh, interesting, thanks

Although this version is somewhat ineffective, I like it because it’s clear and easy to understand.

Also, you can replace:

seen = seen
    .union(&(n * depth).to_string().chars().collect())
    .cloned()
    .collect();

with just:

seen.extend((n * depth).to_string().chars());

I feel your pain. This is why I do these tasks though; the solutions are very insightful (also, nice pfp)

I agree. My comment is from three years ago, I don't even remember this kata. Looks like I let a bit of frustration get the best of me.

Rounding is ( almost ) never the appropriate solution. If something's wrong, provide the problem, not the solution.

Ah, I didn't see that - it's annoying that it's still unfixed after so long

I added = 0 to the equation

added in JavaScript. already existing in Haskell

fixed

isnt this a duplicate of that issue ?

I don't know how this can be wrong - it says it's expecting exactly what I'm returning!

Falsifiable (after 2 tests and 6 shrinks):
  1.0e-2
  0.0
  0.0
expected: Single (-0.0)
 but got: Single (-0.0)