On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 14:01 +0100, Bayley, Alistair wrote: > > From: Simon Marlow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > The lexicographical ordering would make 10.0 > 9.3. In > > general, A.B > C.D > > iff A > C or A == C && B > D. When we say the "latest" > > version we mean > > "greatest", implying that version numbers increase with time. > > Does that help? > > > Sort of. It's what I'd expect from a sensible version comparison. It's > just not something I'd ever choose to call lexicographic ordering. IMO, > lexicographgic ordering is a basic string comparision so e.g. > > max "10.0" "9.3" = "9.3" > > I'd call what you're doing numeric ordering. Does it have a better name, > like version-number-ordering, or section-number-ordering (e.g. Section > 3.2.5, Section 3.2.6)?
It's lexicographic ordering on the list of numbers, not on the string representation. ie it's [10, 0] > [9, 3] not "10.0" > "9.3" Internally we represent version numbers as lists of integers and use the default Ord instance. Duncan _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe