Terribly worded kata. The fact that the objects are preloaded should have been addressed. Had me create two full arrays of objects and then realize it wasn't necessary --'
O enunciado não estava claro o suficiente.
Specify how strict the format should be. The description:
"...return true if the input is in the following date time format 01-09-2016 01:20..."
is not clear enough whether it refers to an actual valid date format or not.
For instance, it's not clear whether "99-99-9999 99:99" and "00-00-0000 00:00" are considered valid.
At least, you can mention something like:
"It doesn't reflect an actual date, it's just a date format. Which means, "99-99-9999 99:99" and "00-00-0000 00:00" are valid"
@Peter Rhodes I do mind about this. I'll raise an issue for it.
Ah, that makes sense. I'll have to declare those in the future. Thank you for explaining :)
Without var / let / const, i becomes a global variable, so yes it's encouraged, more or less mandatory :P
Crazy how I wrote almost the exact same thing! Is the usage of let encouraged in a for loop? I made mines without it.
This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution
The strings are to be split on the capital letters : tests cases don't respect that. Eg: UGo7QGXIA7sSLBtPs35X expects 'UGo7 QGXIA7s SLBt Ps35 X'...
camelCase input should be in camelCase form. Not any random string with spaces in between word. So it's not call camelCase it's something else then.
Hi @Gubeal, you should know it is forbidden to post solutions in the discourse, thanks. I have added the spoiler tag to your comment.
This kata's been already approved, so this question is irrelevant.
just compare "===" vs "=="