On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Brandon S Allbery KF8NH <allb...@ece.cmu.edu> wrote: > On 7/28/10 8:07 PM, Michael Zedeler wrote: >> On 2010-07-29 01:39, Jon Lang wrote: >>> Aaron Sherman wrote: >>>>> In smart-match context, "a".."b" includes "aardvark". >>>> No one has yet explained to me why that makes sense. The continued >>>> use of >>>> ASCII examples, of course, doesn't help. Does "a" .. "b" include >>>> "æther"? >>>> This is where Germans and Swedes, for example, don't agree, but >>>> they're all >>>> using the same Latin code blocks. >>> This is definitely something for the Unicode crowd to look into. But >>> whatever solution you come up with, please make it compatible with the >>> notion that "aardvark".."apple" can be used to match any word in the >>> dictionary that comes between those two words. >> The key issue here is whethere there is a well defined and meaningful >> ordering of the characters in question. We keep discussing the nice >> examples, but how about "apple" .. "ส้ม"? > > I thought that was already disallowed by spec.
As a range, it ought to work; it's only when you try to generate a list from it that you run into trouble, as the spec currently assumes that "z".succ eqv "aa". Anyway: whatever default algorithm we go with for resolving "cmp", I strongly recommend that we define the default .succ so that "$x lt $x.succ" is always true. -- Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
