The specifications indicate that "Your solution should be recursive," while this is not tested. While "should" is a bit of a washy word, other specifications like "Your solution should be 'in place' meaning it return the original object, not a copy." are explicitly tested.

For example, iterative stack-based solutions like this work just fine. This line in the specifications should either be tested or reworded as a hint.

I am not sure what test case I am failing. I am able to pass all of the My Test cases, but when I submit I get:
Test Passed
Test Passed
Value is not what was expected
2 Passed
1 Failed
0 Errors
Process took 51ms to complete

If someone could point me to what test case I am failing that would be great.
Here are my test cases:
//Some garbage data
var data = {
foo: "dynamic",
bar: {
baz: ["dynamic"]
},
dynamic: true
};

//Your solution
var result = solution(data, "static");

//Expect the values to have been changed
Test.expect(result.foo === "static");
Test.expect(result.bar.baz[0] === "static");

//None of this nonsense
//JSON.parse(JSON.Stringify(data).replace(/dynamic/g, "static"))
Test.expect(result.hasOwnProperty("dynamic"));
Test.expect(!result.hasOwnProperty("static"));

//Return the original object
Test.expect(result === data);

Test.assertEquals(solution('dynamic', 'x'), 'dynamic');
Test.assertSimilar(solution({ foo: 'not dynamic'}, 'static'), { foo: 'not dynamic' });

Nice kata.

Two test cases that I miss (and that would invalidate a bunch of solutions, including mine) are:

  Test.assertEquals(solution('dynamic', 'x'), 'dynamic');
  Test.assertSimilar(solution({ foo: 'not dynamic'}, 'static'), { foo: 'not dynamic' });

Thanks for your kata!

There are a lot of strange criteria that seem to be tacked on to the problem and seem to not really add much, and just point the coder to a specific set of solutions, rather than making it more challenging or thought provoking.

Added a clarification.

Updated the description and added some example tests.

This kata is a bit lacking on the description. Some examples and ideally a starter test case would be very useful to help push this through.

It's not apparent to me from the description that the replacement needs to be recursive. Maybe calling it a 'deep' search and replace would be better.

Kata description is a bit misleading. It should be mentioned, that the main object object's properties may also be objects (nesting!). At first I thought there would be no nesting. Moreover you should add an example.