In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 00:16:34 GMT, Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> >So far I have added as is_digit() call to the character type layer
> >to replace the existing isdigit() calls.
>
> There seems to be an overlap with the /\d
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 02:17:31AM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> Also, for string -> integer conversion I think we ought to be scanning
> for a float then turning the result into an integer (as 1234.56e2 is
> one).
Does scanning for a float include 1234,56e2 or any other locale specific
representa
On Thu, 06 Dec 2001 00:16:34 GMT, Tom Hughes wrote:
>So far I have added as is_digit() call to the character type layer
>to replace the existing isdigit() calls.
There seems to be an overlap with the /\d/ character class in regexes.
Can't you use the same test? Can't you use the definition of th
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
James Mastros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Right. Unfornatly, after starting on this, I relized that that's the easy
> part. Unicode has a fairly-well defined way of figuring out if a character
> is a digit (see if it's category is Nd (Number/digit), and i
On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> James Mastros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > > It's completely wrong I would have thought - the encoding layer
> > > cannot know that a given code point is a digit so it
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
James Mastros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > It's completely wrong I would have thought - the encoding layer
> > cannot know that a given code point is a digit so it can't possibly
> > do string to number conversion.
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Tom Hughes wrote:
> It's completely wrong I would have thought - the encoding layer
> cannot know that a given code point is a digit so it can't possibly
> do string to number conversion.
>
> You need to use the encoding layer to fetch each character and
> then the character se
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 05:42:15PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> > The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
> > string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
> > happening, co
On Mon, 3 Dec 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 05:42:15PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> > The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
> > string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
> > happening, comments?
>
> Looks like the right way to m
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 05:42:15PM +, Alex Gough wrote:
> The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
> string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
> happening, comments?
Looks like the right way to me. Could you commit it?
I suppose this is the time
The string to number conversion stuff should really be done by the
string encodings... I think this is the right way to get this
happening, comments?
Alex Gough
Index: string.c
===
RCS file: /home/perlcvs/parrot/string.c,v
retri
11 matches
Mail list logo