• Sign Up
    Time to claim your honor
  • Training
  • Practice
    Complete challenging Kata to earn honor and ranks. Re-train to hone technique
  • Freestyle Sparring
    Take turns remixing and refactoring others code through Kumite
  • Community
  • Leaderboards
    Achieve honor and move up the global leaderboards
  • Chat
    Join our Discord server and chat with your fellow code warriors
  • Discussions
    View our Github Discussions board to discuss general Codewars topics
  • About
  • Docs
    Learn about all of the different aspects of Codewars
  • Blog
    Read the latest news from Codewars and the community
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
exor Avatar
Name:exor
Clan:exor
Member Since:Feb 2017
Last Seen:Jun 2025
Profiles:
    Following:0
    Followers:1
    Allies:0
    View Profile Badges
    • Stats
    • Kata
    • Collections
    • Kumite
    • Social
    • Discourse
    • Conversations
    • Replies (34)
    • Authored
    • Needs Resolution
    • Custom User Avatar
      • chucky-1
      • commented on "Car Park Escape" kata
      • 5 years ago

      "You don't necessarily start at the first floor" Exactly! Now I understand what the mistake is :)

    • Custom User Avatar
      • henryRRR
      • commented on "Sectional Array Sort" kata
      • 8 years ago

      I was also a bit mystified by length = 0 in the random tests.

      I imagine if the length of the segemnt to be sorted is 0, then nothing gets sorted.
      Instead the tests expect length=0 to result in everything from start to the end being sorted

      That aside, thanks for the kata

      ---- this from test results ----
      Testing for [46, -90, -30], 0 and 0

      [46, -90, -30] should equal
      [-90, -30, 46]

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 3" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Well done. Frog exor ^_^

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 3" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Hmm.. the point is, you don't need i++, throw it away~~ you should jumping in the array like a lonely frog ^_^

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 3" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Your algorithm should be faster than O(n), description said. ;-)
      This is a hint.

      And how to find out a faster algorithm?

      All the elements are 1(absolute) difference from its neighbors. description said. ;-)
      This is your weapon.

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 3" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Just re-submitted my solution, and got
      Your code running in range 0ms - 3ms
      As you can see, my slowest time is 3ms. So it's safe enough ^_^

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 3" kata
      • 8 years ago

      ???
      Your code running in range 0ms - 14ms means: In the performance tests, your fastest time record is 0ms, and the slowest time record is 14ms(perhaps meeting some worst case). So, it just a notice/count/recorder for your code.
      You need to optimize your code so that it runs steadily below 6 ms. ;-)

    • Custom User Avatar
      • Voile
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 1" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Perhaps that means you were not using the correct algorithm ;-)

    • Custom User Avatar
      • KenKamau
      • commented on "Prime reduction" kata
      • 8 years ago

      I'm glad you enjoyed the Kata @exor. It was my pleasure.

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Simple Fun #211: Frog's Jumping" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Thanks. Happy coding ^_^

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Simple Fun #349: Big Party" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Another sad story ;-)

    • Custom User Avatar
      • myjinxin2015
      • commented on "Find number in an array # 1" kata
      • 8 years ago

      perhaps your code spent more time to determine which situation is. ;-)

    • Custom User Avatar
      • aweleshetu
      • commented on "Madhav array" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Yes, i did that and now it seems fixed.

    • Custom User Avatar
      • 10XL
      • commented on "Madhav array" kata
      • 8 years ago

      Maybe exor still has the old sample test cases? You could try resetting the kata editor, which will also update sample test cases.

    • Custom User Avatar
      • 10XL
      • commented on "Madhav array" javascript solution
      • 8 years ago

      How is [5,2,4,1,0,3] a Madhav array? This solution returns false as it should considering

      5 = 2+4 = 1+0+3
      5 = 6 = 4
      
    • Loading more items...
    • © 2025 Codewars
    • About
    • API
    • Blog
    • Privacy
    • Terms
    • Code of Conduct
    • Contact

    Confirm

    • Cancel
    • Confirm

    Collect: undefined

    Loading collection data...