On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:55:10 +0900, trans.  (T. Onoma)
<transami / runbox.com> wrote:
> On Thursday 28 October 2004 09:45 pm, Gavin Kistner wrote:
> | On Oct 28, 2004, at 3:42 PM, Aredridel wrote:
> | > I went about implementing one the other day, a subclass of BigDecimal,
> | > and ran into a snag:  SubclassOfBigdecimal.new always returns a
> | > BigDecimal. It doesn't use initialize and alloc or any equivalent,
> | > making subclassing next to impossible.
> |
> | This may be yet another case where the suggested way of implementing
> | the class that is 'mostly a BigDecimal' is to wrap BigDecimal
> | instances:
> 
> I take it that BigDeciaml is techincally immutable then.
> 
> Is BigDeciaml an extra lib one has to install? ri seems to know nothing about
> it, etc. etc.

BigDecimal works by default on my ruby 1.8.2pre2 on PLD.

Yes, the class is technically immutable. I see no reason for this to
be the case, so I'd love to dive in and ~fix the C code.