It's a great idea, but I was able to solve it without really taking the walls into account (except in the sense that they block the path, as an enemy pawn does). Unless you can convince me that they really add something, I think it would be a stronger kata without the walls. To me they are a distraction, and not real chess.

Hi,

• The test framework isn't used properly (decorators + describe vs it blocks. See the docs if needed)
• The full test suite should start with fixed tests
• Why the mixed types? wull strings would make much more sense, or at least, lists of strings.

Cheers

In alot of cases this is true

But there are some scenarios where having a wall instead of a pawn changes the outcome

I haven't solved this yet - my question is based on the description. Are the walls necessary? If each wall was replaced by a black pawn, would the problem be basically the same?

What I have edited:

1. changed the wording of the description to the above
2. changed the parameter name to board
3. added 2 example tests with descriptions

I used chess.com to create the images of the board

Great job! What did you use to create the images of the boards?

Minor editing suggestions:

Replace "b is ..." by "The board is ...."

Replace ""W" representing the WhiteKing" by ""W" representing the white king".

Replace ""0" representing a square with no pieces on it" by ""0" representing an empty square".

Replace "if the black king is in checkmate return true and false otherwise."
by "Return true if the black king is in checkmate and false otherwise."

I recommend changing the parameter name in the Initial Solution from b to board. Encourage the use of descriptive variable names!

It would be nice if the sample tests showed example of all the various cases: not check, check but king can escape, check but king can capture queen, & mate. Even better would be if the random tests were subdivided into those different types - this would help with debugging.

There are related problems, like Check and Mate? and Is the King in check ?. But by simplifying the board I think you have added something.

Badly written description with multiple typos and formatting (minor issue)

Ah I see how that is a bit confusing now, ill change it so that its easier to understand

It says "It is always whites move", which I took to mean it's white's turn next.

Thank you. I am glad you liked it.

It says in the description it is always whites move

Is this Kata based on black not having turns?

Consider this case:

[
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 'B', 0, 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 'W', 0],
    [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]
]

White's only option is to move forward. Black then has to either move forward, or take white. In either case there's no way for White to get around the wall

Nice kata

fixed