The non-cooperation between char-numeric? and string->number is very annoying.
I had to resort to:
(define (my-char-numeric? c)
(char<=? #\0 c #\9))
Maybe I am missing a function similar to my-char-numeric? somewhere in
the Racket docs?
FWIW, my humble opinion is that char-numeric? should be
The non-cooperation between char-numeric? and string->number is very annoying.
I had to resort to:
(define (my-char-numeric? c)
(char<=? #\0 c #\9))
Maybe I am missing a function similar to my-char-numeric? somewhere in
the Racket docs?
FWIW, my humble opinion is that char-numeric? should be
At Thu, 30 Aug 2012 11:36:55 -0400, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> On 2012-08-30 06:53:58 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > I think this combination of replacing both `call/cc' and `dynamic-wind'
> > would be equivalent to a smaller change to the semantics of `call/cc',
> > which is that it behaves as it do
Since the R5RS version of char-numeric? (according to the documentation)
tests for the ten digits, you can use:
(require (only-in r5rs char-numeric?))
/Jens Axel
2012/9/4 Pierpaolo Bernardi :
> The non-cooperation between char-numeric? and string->number is very annoying.
>
> I had to resort to:
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> Since the R5RS version of char-numeric? (according to the documentation)
> tests for the ten digits, you can use:
>
> (require (only-in r5rs char-numeric?))
Thanks Jens Axel. However, the r5rs version appears to be the same as
the Racket
I would say your function would be better named is-digit? and that the
char-numeric? is exactly what it is intended to be with respect to
Unicode characters, which is what a Racket character represents.
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:37 AM, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
> The non-cooperation between char-n
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Doug Williams
wrote:
> I would say your function would be better named is-digit?
Good point. However, many of the characters which are char-numeric?
are digits too, in other writing systems.
> and that the
> char-numeric? is exactly what it is intended to be with
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Doug Williams
wrote:
> I would say your function would be better named is-digit?
Good point. However, many of the characters which are char-numeric?
are digits too, in other writing systems.
> and that the
> char-numeric? is exactly what it is intended to be with
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
>
> What is annoying is that char-numeric? and string->number are not compatible.
`char-numeric?` and `string->number` would not be "compatible" in the
sense you're thinking of, even with the change you mention.
For example:
-> (string-
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Pierpaolo Bernardi
> wrote:
>>
>> What is annoying is that char-numeric? and string->number are not compatible.
>
> `char-numeric?` and `string->number` would not be "compatible" in the
> sense you're t
2012/9/4 Pierpaolo Bernardi :
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 3:11 PM, Jens Axel Søgaard
> wrote:
>> Since the R5RS version of char-numeric? (according to the documentation)
>> tests for the ten digits, you can use:
>>
>> (require (only-in r5rs char-numeric?))
>
> Thanks Jens Axel. However, the r5rs ve
11 matches
Mail list logo
