What if anything anyone has said leads you to an assumption that people are looking for a "last number" in a decimal that clearly is on going (eternal, forever, infinitely, whatever the term for endless in general you want to nitpick about concerning definitions) and still not so clearly equal to one _ pretty damn close by a constantly narrowing margin but still not 1 this .9 thing is a bit of mystery otherwise until someone figures out a way to express it accurately. You speak as if all the rules of numbers have been established and there is nothing that's going to change them. This is a case of an anomaly where no solid rule has been figured out so for sheer laziness on the part of mathematicians for the time being 1=.9(and so on) for practical purposes.
It has been proven
This is no anomaly.
This exercise is getting to the basics of what is the definition of what a rational number is plain and simple. It is not "laziness" by any means
In other words, if one cant understand that .9 repeating =1, than they don't understand the very definition of a rational number