Alaric Snell-Pym scripsit: > >> char-numeric? certainly seems to be of limited use without it, but > >> is the char-numeric?/digit-value pair actually useful at all in the > >> scope of WG1, given string->number? > > > > Unless we are to extend `string->number` to handle non-European > > digits (and then `read`, and then numeric literals?), I think so. > > Well, if digit-value exists and handles all those fun cases, then I > think that read (and, therefore by definition, numeric literals), should > do so too for consistency and to avoid having to have two parallel > digit->number conversions lurking inside every implementation, one a > subset of the other.
It doesn't. Digit-value handles a single character only; string->number handles a string, as its name indicates. A trivial implementation of digit-value can be found at http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/ticket/220 . As noted there, digit-char-p is the CL equivalent of char-numeric? and digit-value combined. -- Principles. You can't say A is John Cowan <[email protected]> made of B or vice versa. All mass http://www.ccil.org/~cowan is interaction. --Richard Feynman _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
