It's a bit worse than just this of course. The description does not specify the solution the tests test for.

n => [0,n].sort(appropriately) would implement the description also. Testing says noooooooooooo.

It's not a testing problem; it's a description problem.

should correctly split negative numbers
expected [ -1, -0 ] to deeply equal [ -1, 0 ]

-1 + -0 == -1 too.

Changed as well.

What about iterator_next?

For some reason I was thinking that bool was an "alias" for some 4-byte type and there was no point in ever using it. Changed int to bool everywhere.

typedef int (*FilterFunction)(const void *);

Why not _Bool aka bool in 2021?

What exactly doesn't work? Any errors? The steps are: fork, edit the description, save.

I'm new to this and don't quite get it.

As you've done a change to the description, how do I choose your version? Editing the text (removing my old part) doesn't seem to work.

C version does not explain what's the expected allocation stratety of returned string.

C++ translation kumited

I have forked it.

Thanks for taking a look!

bruh

fixed

Julia: the function names are different in the initial solution and in the tests.