Pretty nice and mathy kata.

fixed

Description still refers to the previous BigInt implementation.

Thank you for fixing this issue.

fork

• Strings could be returned. But it is easier to keep the current output format unchanged.

• If the inputs are changed to BigInt then the solution setup will be simplified. Right now, it is not even specified that the argument could be a string for large inputs.

• It is fine to invalidate existing solutions. But if the output format is not changed, then it will be possible to keep some existing solutions.

• Shouldn't we use a user friendly string as result, the same way as Python?
• Are BigNumber or BigInt even required in the setup?
• Should we still invalidate existing solutions at this point?

JavaScript: the native BigInt type should be used for inputs and for results.

Ruby

Expected: "58220 is the fouriest (44) in base 14554", instead got: "58220 is the fouriest (3330340) in base 5"

real output: "44 is the fouriest (44) in base 10"

• Ruby 3.0 should be enabled (Refer this & this for more detail)

The random tests are not consistent (in Python at least). Several times I got an expected base of >1e6, and after a few submissions my solution, which checks every base up to ~500, passed.

Yes, python. I now understand, but its written gramaticaly incorrect.

I guess python -- and the test is taken from the description, and it's correct.

language... (edit: not yours, the one of your code! x) )

'35353 is the fouriest (2112403) in base 5' should equal '35353 is the fouriest (431401) in base 6' - wrong test