On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 12:56:19PM -0500, Jim Ursetto wrote: > Heh. That is pretty amusing, but more a formatting issue on the part of > chicken-status. Or you could chalk it up to the egg's use of a flonum > instead of a string or symbolic version number (0.2.3 is read as a symbol, > whereas 0.2 is read as a number). For example, were you to use (version > 1.00), it would read as a flonum and display "1.0" on UNIX, which is just as > incorrect as "1." in my opinion. > > One way to quickly fix this for your case is to change (version 1.0) to > (version "1.0") in your .setup file. I try to use string version numbers > exclusively now for consistency's sake.
Same here. And what's more, flonums can't really be compared for equality (in general), which may lead to more subtle and hard-to-find problems. We should probably change chicken-install to reject non-string version numbers, but it's probably too late to do this now and may cause too much breakage. Cheers, Peter -- http://www.more-magic.net _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list Chicken-users@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
