BigDecimal.new('200.') raises an exception
BigDecimal.new('200.') raises an exception:
ArgumentError: invalid value for BigDecimal(): "200."
It should accept this as a valid decimal number.
This requires fixing numbers read in from the wild.
Updated by shevegen (Robert A. Heiler) about 2 years ago
I believe you mean for BigDecimal.new('200.') to be equivalent to BigDecimal.new('200.0')?
I could see both ways be ok; there may be use cases where the error is better because of
the user not being explicit enough; or the user does not want to have to type in the
trailing '0'. So I can't say whether this is really a bug or not, it may be specifically
wanted to be that way.
I guess if there are no trade offs though, then I'd agree with the proposal if you meant
that it is the same to mean for a trailing '0' there - but I could also see for purity
to require the '0' to be passed.
What about input such as:
I mean it will be 0 anyway... it reads strangely to omit the the '0' to my eyes though ...
Latest docu can be found here, if anyone else is interested:
Updated by ddoherty03 (Daniel Doherty) about 2 years ago
Robert, yes, I think it should be the same as BigDecimal.new('200.0'). The problem arises, not when a programmer is typing the number---requiring a programmer to be explicit is OK by me---but when strings are processed that come from a user of the code.
ss = '200.' # Read from a user-prepared file.
BigDecimal.new(ss) => ArgumentError ...
As it is, the programmer has to massage every string to recognize a reasonable, albeit a bit sloppy, string that is clearly meant as a valid number.
Also, it seems crazy to me that
BigDecimal.new('200hello world') => 0.2e3
but BigDecimal('200.') raises an ArgumentError exception. Just sayin...