On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:12 PM, Mike Duvos <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Nick,
>
> APL historically has required consecutive numbers to be separated by at
> least one character that can't be part of a number.
>
> This differs from the lex approach of matching the longest legal thing,
> and not caring about the next thing beginning immediately thereafter.
>
> Since doing it differently doesn't add any new functionality, it's
> probably best to just stick with the way it's always been done.
>
> Such occurrences in peoples code are almost always typos, and it's best to
> tell them about them.
>

Agreed.

Reply via email to