Yeah, I regret writing that translation. The problem with letting the user return nested pointers like char ** is that in good logic they should then also write a corresponding custom freeing function, e.g. void free_words(size_t n, char *words[n]);. But then many users would just leave it blank, because the tests would not check its correctness (it's not impossible to do so, but it is very cumbersome and clunky); so it would make for an awkward kata that asks to write two functions but can only reliably test one of them.

I don't like how this kata enforces a specific memory layout of C strings. If it wasn't so strict I could have just stored them back to back in a single allocation and just used the strtok output. That would have been nice

Perl translation

This kata was decided to stay.

Module forbidder deals with this but is really just a bandaid until we get the ability to retire translations.

OCaml translation (author gone)

For the anti-cheat, is there a way to overwrite the global eval function to throw an error?

Despite the instructions, I still see it in several solutions here by assigning it to a variable outside the exported function.

[''] == []

so, if ur failing the last test case.... just move on. this kata needs to be revised

Решил эту задачу, все достаточно просто, если делать через список.

Had a working solution that was bringing back errors for extensions on the strings - had to look at solutions to see that

using System.Linq;

needed to be added

should have been raised as an issue. no UB here, just a mistake on my part, an == that should have been a != during comparison when either of the words was a null pointer. fixed.

I'm Happy to finish this challenge (if I calc the time that I spend to solve It take like 1day or 2day)

??

I don't know about your solution, but with C this is not uncommon to happen. This sometimes happens due to undefined behavior (UB) coming from your solution and influencing the tests. I was told that it's difficult / impossible to combat this from tests' side.