On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 03:19:21PM +0000, David Cantrell wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 12:15:23PM -0600, Peter da Silva wrote: > > On 2008-01-15, at 10:03, David Cantrell wrote: > > >Then stop calling them version NUMBERS. > > >While you, and other people, continue to do so, then people will > > >assume that "hey, it's a number" and "I can do numbery things with > > >it". > > If a programmer thinks that just because something's a number that > > means you can do "numbery things" with it, they need remedial training. > > Given that it's a *version* *number*, adding them, multiplying them, and > so on, obviously aren't useful. But comparing them clearly is useful.
(not really drectly at anyone, but a followon) These numbers maybe. But there are all sorts of numbers we don't compare at all, except the most snarky computer programmer way, like phone numbers or social security numbers or personal identification numbers you use to insecurely access your checking account. I don't know what perl idiot decided that one kind of number had to act (and be treated) like another kind of number just because they look similar--sometimes, but not others--but let's not repeat the error, shall we? -josh
