It's not. I'm effectively modifying the inputs which is then tested against your code. Because I've modified the inputs, I'm able to pass the random tests and hardcode the sample tests. There's also the function function labyrinth(...) in the starter code still (double function keyword).

Not entirely fixed. We still have issues:
https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/68758c4e27434ab0b1f5d518/groups/687594793cfb3f47cf47c3b0

• missing random tests
• the function signature uses function twice

.

The input can be modified which impacts tests:

https://www.codewars.com/kata/reviews/687506e5adfbb3203aebe4b2/groups/6875135e3cfb3f47cf47b62a

The beta process exists to resolve issues before potential approval. While my solution might be ridiculous to you, input modification of mutable objects is an issue. Anyways, if you stick around long enough on codewars, that and not having random tests come up a lot in beta testing.

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/workspace/default/.venv/lib/python3.11/site-packages/codewars_test/test_framework.py", line 112, in wrapper
    func()
  File "/workspace/default/tests.py", line 31, in large_exp
    expected = mod_power(a, b, n)
               ^^^^^^^^^
NameError: name 'mod_power' is not defined

Your tests rely on the user also defining this function. Check my solution for what could go wrong by doing that.

from random tests:

polar_form(31531-494i) = > '31534.8695e^(6.2675*i)' should equal '31534.8695e^(3.1259*i)'

polar_form(4+3i) = > '5e^(0.6435*i)' should equal '5e^(0.9273*i)'

This is incorrect, as are many of the tests.
5e^(0.6435*i) => 4+3i
5e^(0.9273*i) => 3+4i

Approved. Thanks for contributing.

I'm on my phone so not really looking. The error I pasted above in one of the bullet points seems to imply you're not importing the the assert function.

Okay, that's better. The sample tests still fail to run without erroring.

• missing random tests
• needs more explanation of 'simple dictionary words' => is this a preloaded variable, etc.?
• bordering on being a duplicate (yes this is slightly more advanced, but password validation has been done before several times on codewars)
• the sample tests error when run (spec/solution_spec.lua:1: attempt to call a nil value (global 'assert_match'))
• this is nowhere near being a 1kyu => more realistically a hard 6 or a 5

Well, I just woke up. I believe it stemmed from the original issue referencing values. Anyways, it's fixed.