• ###### unlink.unperkscommented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

This one was fun & simple.

• ###### LenkaIacocommented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

Still, the order of the characters is an issue:
Expected 236=[L, X, G, H]}
as error: 236=[G, X, H, L]}>

"
expected:<{432=[A, B, D], 53=[C], 11=[P, R, S], 236=[L, X, G, H]}> but was:<{432=[A, B, D], 53=[C], 11=[P, R, S], 236=[G, X, H, L]}>
"

• ###### ejini战神resolved a question on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

OP solved it, closing

• ###### EvgKrmcommented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

Nice Kata, thank you, but only one question: according to example tests the output should be in increasing order, but solutions with both increasing or decreasing order pass the test. Don’t you need to mention this in the description?

• ###### eurydice5717created a suggestion for "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

IMHO in C++ your map type msv could be better. If at one point you have to sort the keys with comparing the 'int' corresponding value (see the solution, 80% of them begin with that), then you would declare this comparator IN THE msv type !

Same!

• ###### user1430804commented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

Good one.. enjoyed it !

• ###### Opabiniacommented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

Well, I've written a really nice solution, but it outputs the letters in a different order to that expected (not mentioned in the kata description, incidentally!)

Because I'm so happy with the code I've written, I don't want to solve this kata, now. It does everything according to the description, but doesn't pass the tests which expects the letters to be ordered. Shame!

• ###### arshsingh5211created a question for "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution

nice kata!

• ###### Alex1976commented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

Thank you, and I'm sorry.

• ###### Chrono79resolved a question on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

`flat` requires Node 11.0.0.

• ###### Alex1976created a question for "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

This comment is hidden because it contains spoiler information about the solution

• ###### dfhwzecommented on "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

signature in java:

`public static Map<Integer, List<String>> removeDuplicateIds(Map<Integer, List<String>> obj)`

I would except the following if we were able/expected to mutate the input:

`public static void removeDuplicateIds(Map<Integer, List<String>> obj)`

• ###### dfhwzecreated a question for "Duplicates. Duplicates Everywhere." kata

In general (and also in this kata), even when input arguments are copies of objects to verify against, should input arguments be immutable?
For instance, in Java, we are allowed to mutate the Map<Integer, List> we are given.