Bug #17032: BigDecimal's `to_d` behaves inconsistent compared to `to_f`

• Status: Closed
• Assignee: -
• Target version: -
• ruby -v: 2.5.5
• Backport: 2.5: UNKNOWN, 2.6: UNKNOWN, 2.7: UNKNOWN

[TiloS (Tilo S)]

I would expect to_f and to_d to behave identically. Specifically, nil.to_d should behave like nil.to_f.

require 'bigdecimal'
require 'bigdecimal/util'
nil.to_f # => 0.0
nil.to_d # >> NoMethodError (undefined method `to_d' for nil:NilClass)

Users should not have to resort to this:

nil.to_f.to_d #  => 0.0

[sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)]

• Subject changed from BigDecimal .to_d is behaving inconsistent compared to .to_f to `BigDecimal#to_d` behaves inconsistent compared to `#to_f`
• Description updated (diff)

[sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)]

• Subject changed from `BigDecimal#to_d` behaves inconsistent compared to `#to_f` to BigDecimal's `to_d` behaves inconsistent compared to `to_f`

[jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans)]

• Status changed from Open to Closed

NilClass#to_d was added in Ruby 2.6. As it is not security-related (and seems more like a new feature than a bug fix), it will not be backported to Ruby 2.5, as that is in security maintenance mode.