Done for Python.

gandalf you misled me :(

Thanks for the info.

Normally it should occur very rarely, so it's not an actual problem to pass the kata (~70 completions dealt with this so far)

Now about the "why"... The original author isn't active anymore, and I already spent way too much time on this kata (I'm not talking about solving, there). So yeah, I'm not the one who would fix that, sorry...

edit: if it occurs very often for you, that would mean you're algo is actually incorrect.

I got it but I'd like to get a reasonable explanation to my question: "Why this is not fixed yet?"
Or at least an advice for a workaround.
It makes to complete this kata painful.

duplicated issue. It's already known, no need to raise again.

Few randomized tests has incorrect reference value. I can see the this is also reported a few years ago.
Why this is not fixed yet?

Ie. the reference return value should be 34 hovever the shortest path is 32.

XXX__XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX_____

XXX__XXXXXXXXXXXX____XXXXXXXXX__

XXX_______________XXXXXXXXX______XXXXXXX

XXX__XXXXXXXXX__L____L______

XXX____________L___L____E___________

XX___________L_______L_XXXXXXXXX____

_XXX_________L____XXXXXXXXX_XXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX_______L_______XXXXXXXXX__XXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX______LXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX____XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XX______LXXXXXXXXX________________XXXXXXXXX

XXX_____XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX__XX

XXX_______L____________________________XXXXX

XX_________________________XXXXXXXXX____XXXX

XX_________LXXXXXXXXX___XXXXXXXXX___XXXXXXXX

XXX______________________________________XXXX

XXX__________L__________________________XXXXX

XX___________XXXXXXXXXXXXXX___________XXXXXXX

XX__________L__XXXXXXXXX______________XXXXXXX

XX___________________XXXXXXXXX__XXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX_________L______XXXXXXXXX_XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX_____________XXXXXXXXXXXX____XXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX________L_______________XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX______________XXXXXXXXX_____XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX_______LXXXXXXXXXXXXX_________XXXXXXXXX

XXX_________________XXXXXXXXX___XXXXXXXXX__XXX

XXX______L______XXXXXXXXX______XXXXXXXXXX

XXX__________________________XXXXXXXXXXXXX_XXX

XXX_____L___________________XXXXXXXXXX

XXX_______________XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX______X

XXX____L__XXXXXXXXX__XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX_____XXX

XXX_______XXXXXXXXX______XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX_____L___XXXXXXXXX___________XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX_________XXXXXXXXX____________XXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXX______L________________________XXXXXXXXXXXX

XX______________________XXXXXXXXX_XXXXXXXXXX

XX_______L___XXXXXXXXXXXX__________XXXXXXXXX

XX________XXXXXXXXX_________________XXXXXXXX

_XXX_____L________XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXX______________XXXXXXXXXXXX_XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXX__L___XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX_______XXXXX_XXXXXX

XXXXXXX___XXXXXXXXXXX____________XXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXX_LXXXXXXXXX________XXXXXXXXXX__XXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXX__L___L___L___XXXXXXXXXXXXX____XXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXX___L___L___S___XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXX__XXXXXXXXX__XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXX_______XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

__XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX___XXXXXXXXXX__________XXX

I think this issue is still there.

should be good now. Reset the trainer, plz.

some tests 1:
start(x, y)
dest(x, y)
obstacls(x, y)

some tests 2:
start(x, y)
dest(x, y)
obstacls(y, x)

Why?

Input range should be specified.

Interestingly, I get this solution due to the heuristic that I used:

                                     #######     0
                                 ###############
                                ####         #### 1
                               ####           ####
                              ###               ###2
                              ###               ###
                             ###                 ###3
                             ##                   ##
                            ###                   ###4
                             ##                   ##
                             ###                 ###5
                              ###               ###
                              ###               ###6
                               ####           ####
                                ####         #### 7
  ####                           ###############8
   ####                            ###########9
    #####                            #######0
      #####                               1
        ######               ##         2
          #######################     3
            ###################     4
             6  ###########       5
                4   2   0   8   6
            7 5   3   1   9   7

The directions are a bit sparse. I think using the word "rank" to signify both the letter_value and the position in sorted winning_numbers could be confusing.

I SOLVED IT! GREAT KATA!!! xDD