On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 1:08 PM, David Cantrell <da...@cantrell.org.uk>wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 02:41:41PM +0200, The Sidhekin wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Nigel Horne <n...@bandsman.co.uk> wrote:
> > > On 09/07/10 12:36, David Cantrell wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 08:48:26AM +0100, Nigel Horne wrote:
> > >>> Module Need Have
> > >>> ! DBD::Pg 2.6 2.17.1
> > >> It needs 2.6, it has 2.017001. It's reporting that the version it has
> > >> of DBD::Pg is too low.
> > > 2.17 is the latest version.
> > ... but the lower of the version numbers in question. :-P
>
> 2.17.1 isn't a version *number* at all as it isn't a number. It is a
> higher *version* than 2.6.
>
Oh, but it is (or, if you insist, functions, through coercion, as) a
number. Specifically, it "is" 2.017001.
> I suppose this exposes another bug: that you can compare different data
> types (in this case a number and a version) without an explicit cast :-)
>
I thought that was the Perl way.
if ("2" > 1) {
say 'Yup, "2" is (or, if you insist, functions, through coercion, as) a
number. Specifically, it "is" 2.';
}
Eirik
