Yuri, thank you for your suggestions. You were completely right. There are bug in my solution which causes infinite loop on particular tests. Discovering this fact took so much time just because i had used console printing not thoroughly enough for the first time:-)

Sorry, Yuri, but someone has desided that your comment contains spoiler, and i hasn't read it :-(
I smell a conspiracy here :-)

Hello, Yuri!
Could it be possible, that for final qualification (attemt) somehow server dedicates less resources than for sample tests running?
I just can't find reasonal explanation to the fact, that my code easily passes same set of tests as on final qualification but only in "sample tests" environment...

We have a different C# complaint.

Could you see if his problem is reproducible? It might also be a platform issue, I have no way to tell.

Sorry, only see this now.

Leave it as is, for the foreseeable future.

ATM we only have two solutions anyway (one of which is yours). When people start complaining it's too easy, it'll be early enough to upgrade it.

I'd like to disagree with you on the importance, &c.

If about half the solvers complain they had to do real work optimising their previous solution then the kata hit the mark I intended to set. But the kata should be solvable. Otherwise, (a) it'll never get out of beta (what rating it gets is then up to the community, but it's been set now and translations should reasonably comply with that) and (b) it only leads to frustration with solvers. Neither seems to me to be the intention of this platform.

Please, correct me if i'm wrong: the C random tests always use the first test case only.

In the cpp random tests i made it test all 7 test cases.

Hope it's al'right.

These 7 test cases have different levels of complexity so a time consumption of different tests varies widely (depends on an algorithm).

In C translation is used only one test case as the basis of random tests to obtain a more stable total time consumption. This is important for 10 random tests.

Of course, for a large number of tests, the total time consumption doesn't depend on the level of complexity of individual tests.

I approved the C++ translation, but @Yury, please note that for Description backtick-blocks C++ is not c++, it's called cpp.

Other than that it looks good (as far as I can tell) :] though I'm not sure the tests are hard enough. But time will tell, and the number of random tests can always be increased.

Thank you very much!

There should be Data.Number.Primes, but it seemed to be unavailable on CodeWars.

Voile, something else: did you see the Haskell translation on Integer to Nested Structure? I'm not sure it should be approved as is; please have a look (see the comment over there).

I checked, I can approve it. I'll have a look at it - but that'll be tomorrow.

Thanks, also for your patience.

I can't approve it for some reason. Maybe @JohanWiltink has to do it.