5 kyu
Base64 Numeric Translator
108 of 1,216danielpclark
Loading description...
Puzzles
This comment has been reported as {{ abuseKindText }}.
Show
This comment has been hidden. You can view it now .
This comment can not be viewed.
- |
- Reply
- Edit
- View Solution
- Expand 1 Reply Expand {{ comments?.length }} replies
- Collapse
- Spoiler
- Remove
- Remove comment & replies
- Report
{{ fetchSolutionsError }}
-
-
Your rendered github-flavored markdown will appear here.
-
Label this discussion...
-
No Label
Keep the comment unlabeled if none of the below applies.
-
Issue
Use the issue label when reporting problems with the kata.
Be sure to explain the problem clearly and include the steps to reproduce. -
Suggestion
Use the suggestion label if you have feedback on how this kata can be improved.
-
Question
Use the question label if you have questions and/or need help solving the kata.
Don't forget to mention the language you're using, and mark as having spoiler if you include your solution.
-
No Label
- Cancel
Commenting is not allowed on this discussion
You cannot view this solution
There is no solution to show
Please sign in or sign up to leave a comment.
Scala translation
Rust translation
D translation
Go translation (author is inactive).
Missing
itblocks for sample and fixed tests (in python)wierd. when i look at the "Test Cases" section on this page i do see
itblocks. also when training on the kata i seeitblocks. but in the actual translation it missing..nvm, now there's alr, I forgot to reset trainer I think XD
i added them in the meantime ^^
new Python translation. mainly added random tests and appropriate use of the tests framework.
approved
5 Kyu ranking seems much too high, for sure for C.
agree
No random tests in:
added random tests here. please review.
added random tests to ruby
COBOL translation, including random tests (author is inactive).
C Translation published, has random tests, waiting for feedback and/or approval.
No random tests.
re-raising with details
[JavaScript] Identifier names (except for constructor functions) should be in
camelCase(source) and notsnake_case- please change the name of the user solution frombase64_to_base10tobase64ToBase10.fixed with backwards-compatibility
This comment has been hidden.
Did a Java translation. Please review and approve.
This was a great kata, but I would argue that it is closer to a 7/6 kyu difficulty level.
I have been having trouble with meeting the 600ms time limit for multiple kata's including this one.
Could anyone please give me tips?
Maybe a term or topic I could google/research on?
Without knowing what you tried to come to this difficulty I don't know what to tell you. In JavaScript there may be a noticeable diference in how you multiply by powers of another number. But people have been successful in both main ways.
Some language I fear might still miss enough random tests, plus for the future try to keep naming conventions (snake_case for Python or Ruby, camelCase for JS, etc).
Quite enjoyable kata anyway :)
(This issue affects JavaScript and CoffeeScript, or any other language that automatically switches to double/doesn't support arbitrary large integral numbers)
The test case
"1234567890"expects970208572785807200. However, that number exceeds the range for (unsigned) 32bit integers. Therefore, JS falls back to double precision values. The largest integral value one can save there isNumber.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER(9007199254740991), so one has to expect approximation issues. Alsolog10(9702085727858072) > 15, therefore the last number can depend on how you sum the number. And indeed, if you use Horner's method, you'll end up with a wrong answer: 970208572785807___1___00.So either use relative error checking for those numbers that exceed the range of safe integers, or don't use too large values (
Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGERis"f////////"in base64). See also the Codex section (JavaScript specific section).Thanks for letting me know! I'll look into it. I had noticed after adding bigger numbers anything that didn't usee double star
**syntax failed to pass.I've removed the larger cases.
Needs some random tests.
Added. Should be good enough right?
Hi there I found a bit of a problem with the third example test case for Python:
This should be either this:
or this:
The original is correct. It's currently "BA". There is no "AB" test. Perhaps you accidentally switched them?
Issue resolved (user error).