No matter how i try guys i will never can fix any of these questio nim trying guys i cant well .... there is othing wec an do ? ? can anyone understand me?

The starting orientation of the robot is not specified (only the starting position). If the top-left tile is or K the move is undefined.

Actual tests give You didn't clear the named param variable (TIP: USE 'delete this[...]')! when example tests pass, so clearly the example tests and actual tests have two different testing mechanisms, and hence the sample tests do not reflect what is actually being tested.

This kata is simply a bad idea, period.

(The reason is left as an exercise to the reader, but any sane reader should've figured this out)

Very good logic! liked this solution!

So, it does work. And please, remember using spoiler flag next time when posting code.

And, of course, I know 0 === -0.
May be it's reason to tests work.
But a visual area has problem and users see -0.

There is a test with -1 and this code works, why do you say it doesn't? Have you tried it?

Sorry, but this code doesn't work if n === -2, for example.
We have -0, but we can't.
We need to write about it. If we have -0 return 0.

lol. I feel dumb.

Simplicity, the ultimate sophistication.

Genius. From my humble perspective at least

better to do CONST value for 10, i done so, but think then more

If the requirements state "10 or more," then I think it is better to translate that language directly to code (i.e., "foo >= 10") rather than to a logical but inferred equivalent.

However obvious the inference might seem to you, it might not be so obvious to the maintenance developer who needs to understand how your code manages to fulfill (or, if he is fixing a defect, how it fails to fulfill) the requirements.

An obvious exception is when performance is an issue--but, then, only when performance is an active, demonstrable issue. (In this case, there is no performance advantage either way.)