El lun., 14 ene. 2019 a las 18:41, Brad Gilbert (<b2gi...@gmail.com>)

> Nl is not “*non-arabic numbers*” and it is not “*numbers that have a
> value by themselves*”.
> While both seem like correct statements, they are the wrong way to think
> about the Nl category.
> If either were entirely correct then there wouldn't be a need for No
> (Number other).
> *Nl (Number letter)* is for *“Numerals composed of letters or letterlike
> symbols (e.g., Roman numerals)”*
> (copied from
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:General_Category_(Unicode) )
> Note that Roman numerals also “*have a positional value*” and can “*be
> collated to other numbers to form bigger numbers*”.

No, they don't, at least not in Perl 6:

say ⅮⅭ

You can try for any other Nl, it just does not. However:

    say Ⅾ+Ⅽ; OUTPUT: «600␤»

(because they have a numeric value by themselves).

Only those with the Nd property can be collated to form any kind of number;
these are in number system which are positional and decimal (at least those
I've tried):

    say ߁߃ # OUTPUT: «13␤»

(these are Nko digits)



Reply via email to