Tony-Samuels

This is stabilised and the docs on how to do so are available [here](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/attributes/debugger.html). I suspect the MR to do this should be pretty easy for GDB given the text...

Duplicate of #511. We'll keep the other one open for now, as this one seems to be resolved by just switching to `bigdecimal`.

If you just want to unwrap it immediately, maybe use the `dec!` macro?

I don't think this is possible in stable without going through `AtomicPtr`, which can probably then be used directly. Given that an nod response in a fair while, closing this...

I think `Decimal` is in a good place as a library that only handles actual numbers. This enables things like `Hash` and `Eq` to be implemented, which can't for `f64`...

It sounds like this has been tried and probably isn't of use right now. Given the lower performance and the other reasons being a change in scale which I think...

You want the `normalize`[1] or `normalize_assign`[2] functions, to strip the extra 0. [1] https://docs.rs/rust_decimal/latest/rust_decimal/struct.Decimal.html#method.normalize [2] https://docs.rs/rust_decimal/latest/rust_decimal/struct.Decimal.html#method.normalize_assign

We're trying to decide the best way to approach this in general. E.g. #611.

I would *suggest* the approach should be to update the docs to remove this guarantee. The main problem is that whilst you're correct that the current implementation is not aligned...

A separate issue to removing the docs is still whether the maintainer wishes to change the alignment to match that of `u128`, which wouldn't be unreasonable. However I think the...