On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:31:06AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote: : : On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 10:26 PM, Dave Storrs wrote: : >I would assume that 0B0110, 0C0123, and 0X00FF are all equivalent to : >the forms with lower-case base markers, right? : : Huh, dunno. Let's ask for a ruling on that.
No. Has to be lower case. : >> -0xff # ok : >> -0x00ff # ok : >Are these two identical? : : Yep. : : >Is 0x-ff an error? (I would say yes.) : : Yes! Yes. : >> 0x_ff # ok : > : >Wait a minute...the rule is that underscore can only appear between : >digits. Here, the 'x' is not a digit, it is a base marker. : >Therefore, shouldn't this be an error? : : Oops, yes. Sorry. Though we could probably allow it without : ambiguity, if people wanted it. Same with 1.234_e_5. Don't think so. : >The more I think on it, the more it seems like the negative sign : >should really go to the right of the colon (20:-1GJ)...otherwise, it : >really does look like you're using a negative radix (is that even : >possible?). I realize this is out of step with the traditional -0xff, : >but it still seems like The Right Thing to me...what do other people : >think? : : Larry said -20:1GJ, because (paraphrasing) the '-' is a unary operator : meaning "negate", not a part of the literal number itself. So you're : specifying the number 20:1GJ, then negating it. Only it's -20#1GJ this week. : >> 62:zZ # base 62 (?) : >> 62:z.Z # base 62 (identical?) : >> 62:z_Z # base 62 (identical?) : >> 62:Zz # base 62 (not identical?) : : Yes, that part shouldn't be in there anymore, we indeed nixed it. : Can't use letters with radix > 36, have to use the coloned form. : : : >> (radix 33-RADIX_MAX) : >> : >> 256:0.253.254.255 # base 256 : >> 256:0_253_254_255 # base 256 : > : >Are these two intended to be identical or not? I expect not...the : >first should be a 4 digit number and the second a 10 digit number. : : Yes, they're very different. These days: 256#0:253:254:255 # base 256 256#0_253_254_255 # base 256 Note that 256#0.253.254.255 # base 256 is trying to call the 254 method on 256#0.253, since you can only have one radix point. Laryr
