Just adding to Ufuk's great explanation and to make it super clear, to fix your case, you need to call `Integer('08', 10)` and `Integer('09', 10)`.retro (Josef Šimánek)
Was it considered keep `make_shareable` name, but port it outside of `Ractor` class to make it independent of the "sharing" implementation and useful for JRuby and others?retro (Josef Šimánek)
ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu) wrote in #note-18: > retro (Josef Šimánek) wrote in #note-17: > ... @ufuk Sure, I'm aware of and I do fully respect this. Ruby itself is not simple to version, since next to the language (having amazing backwa...retro (Josef Šimánek)
> * There might be situations when such package passes it test suite, but later it is not usable just due to the metadata. Yup, this is frustrating and I do understand for some it can justify open ended Ruby constraint. Let's find a s...retro (Josef Šimánek)
> Well no. This all stems from you following a very inefficient and user-unfriendly workflow (which you are entirely free to). @byroot Well yes, I think I have clearly stated that your workflow could be also very inefficient and user-...retro (Josef Šimánek)
@byroot just to make it clear, I'm not saying I'm big fan of the current situation, but I just described how the whole ecosystem is designed right now. It is quite old rusty design, not being revisited for years. I agree with you to disa...retro (Josef Šimánek)
@byroot I would not suggest this in general. It can work both ways. Having strict Ruby constraints help to revisit gems after new Ruby release and provides confidence to resolver to install only tested versions for given Ruby. What you s...retro (Josef Šimánek)
retro (Josef Šimánek)12:22 PM Ruby Bug #21677: Integer("08") raises an ArgumentError