Very nice series, quite a bit challenging.

Please use code formatting blocks and spoiler flag when posting code.

By no means this is 7kyu problem.. least this is 5kyu...

This is a minor and admittedly picky suggestion that doesn't affect the Kata's functionality. The original description was likely written with an object-oriented language in mind, which explains the reference to a "method".

The only change I'd suggest is updating the C language description to use the term "function" instead of "method", since C doesn't support methods in the OOP sense. Here's a fork with that small wording adjustment, in case you'd like to merge it:
https://www.codewars.com/kumite/68912a45d61d89e470fe3b6c?sel=68912a45d61d89e470fe3b6c

Again, this is purely a cosmetic change.

oh common mistake~~ thanks a lot

approved

I'm not sure it's better if it does not pass the kata.

Your code as I can see it had a mistake:

expected 'Hello. My name is Bob. I am 27.I am male.'
to equal 'Hello. My name is Bob. I am 27. I am male.'

...seeing as this return value is missing a space between the final two sentences.

(·•᷄‎ࡇ•᷅ )

whoa there

Fix SIGSEGV in C:
https://www.codewars.com/kumite/688ca4a860fc0f34b91b5c9d?sel=688ca4a860fc0f34b91b5c9d

Nice kata, but most likely I would rate it as 6 kyu, not 7

Great minds think alike LOL, I adore this solution, but good catch with turning numbers[] to n[], overlooked that

Attempting this with Python and it's a nightmare, lol.

Your new solution will pass the tests, and I completely agree that it will not be based on luck. However you did not call String.intern() in the current solution we are discussing, so that one is wrong. Your example does prove that my wording was too absolute: yes, it can be OK to compare string objects with == if you know precisely how the language works and you took the necessary precautions beforehand, it was the general case I had in mind.

One way they can learn is trying == and failing tests.