Re: [Jscheme-user] string->number problem

[Timothy J. H. <ti...@cs...>]

On May 28, 2004, at 10:44 AM, Ken Anderson wrote:

> Now we can't parse a number with a leading "0" even if we say base 10.
>> (string->number "08")
> #f
>> (string->number "08" 10)
This is clearly not good. I'll fix it!

> #f
>> (string->number "8" 10)
> 8



>
> Can we make this base 8 stuff optional?
We can back out these changes for now if it is causing backward 
compatibility problems....

>  Usually when i see a leading 0 in data it is expecting to be 
> interpreted as base 10.  For example May is month "05".
We could go back to the original interpretation and have 08 be 
converted to 8.0....

The problem here is that a program can contain
     0100
and we wouldn't know whether they meant that in base 8 or base 10.
The only time a leading zero number would be base 10 is if it happens 
to contain an 8 or 9,
this seems like it could generate hard to catch bugs!

One nice thing we've done with Jscheme is have the literal syntax be 
almost exactly the same
as Java literal syntax. This makes it easy for Java programmers (and 
easy for us as we don't have
to write a special manual about the syntax of literals).

We also have a Scheme literal mode
   (set! jsint.U.useJavaMode #f)
which turns off the Java literal mode ....

For now, we could have a backward compatibility switch that reverts to 
the old style,
but I think for the future it will be easier for us if we stick to pure 
Java literal syntax..

>
> k
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g
> Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 
> 10g.
> Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE.
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> Jscheme-user mailing list
> Jsc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jscheme-user