My apologies, I didn't express my self clearly enough (I was typing it at 3am). What I wanted to say that: this code is much clear and easier to understand than "oneliner". When you have a team of 10 developers working togather it is imortant so everyone understends code quikly.

Thank you for your comment, it was useful!

As a developer I would say this is one of the closest code that I would like to have submitted by my employees.
The one line code is not readable from first glace and not self explanatory.

Can't. Description cannot be approved, recent changes from related record must be merged first.

@omegahm: I approved your translation. Can you approve my C# translation?

Can't approve my own translation. :)

This looks good to me. Any reason why this hasn't been approved yet?

Many thanks for your contribution; reviewed and approved :D

Okay, I just implemented the changes. Let me know what you think!

Hi Donald.

1. I used next_node because next is a reserved keyword in Ruby, equivalent to continue in other languages.
2. I'll make sure to update all instances of next to next_node in the Description.
3. I will also add in nil in the appropriate places in Description.
4. I will correct the reference solution.
5. I will alter the random tests to be in line with the assertion wording.

Many thanks for taking the time to translate my Kata into Ruby; however, there are a few things that need to be modified/clarified before it can be approved:

1. [Clarification] Other language versions use the next/Next property to access the next node in the linked list so I'm not sure why Ruby uses next_node instead?
2. [Conditional Modification] If you intend to keep the next_node exception in Ruby, please update all relevant parts of the Description where next/$next/Next is mentioned to include the Ruby version as well, like such: next/$next/Next/next_node.
3. [Required Modification] Likewise, please also update all parts of the Description which say "null/NULL/None" to include the Ruby nil - I think you missed a few instances in the middle of the Kata Description.
4. [Required Modification] Please check the method body of your reference solution - your recursive case seems to call on the user solution instead of itself wink
5. [Required Modification] Your random tests seem to only execute once despite the header saying "should pass all 100 random tests provided" - please execute the random assertions 100 times instead (just wrap the existing code in the random test block into a 100.times block or something).

Ruby translation

Please review and hopefully approve!

Thanks!

Ruby Translation

Please review and hopefully approve!

Agreed - the instructions need to be expanded upon a bit. Some codewarriors won't be familiar with the concept of XOR going into this kata. While I'm glad the exercise pushed me to do some research and learn something new, none of the sources I consulted quite described the process this kata abbreviates as "XOR them". I ended up having to figure out that process via guess and check.