On 28 Oct 2013, at 10:41, Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> So what we decide to do with this?
>
> I can work on that case, but I have 2 questions:
>
> - do we care to provide parsing of numbers in other notations as Pharo one?
That’s a good question.. I completely misunderstood the code there because that
sounds a bit
strange that a language supports other languages syntax, but not “inside” the
language but somehow as a tool…
I fear that even if someone needs Fotran number parsing, the last place to look
would be the Pharo base kernel
classes...
> - what is the number syntax that we want to support?
>
Yes, we we need to document it. Right now it is “some extended Squeak format”
which is just defined by the implementation.
Marcus
> Cheers!
> Uko
>
> On 19 Aug 2013, at 10:05, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> thanks!
>>
>> Stef
>>
>>> I think just because 1.0s was explicitely not supported in Squeak?
>>> There should be some related tests...
>>> It should be rather simple to change.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/8/13 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>
>>> Hi nicolas
>>>
>>> We would really like to have only one number parser in Pharo as well as
>>> handling the 1.0s syntax
>>> marcus raised a question that I could not answer.
>>> Do you habve nfrmation to share with us so that we can take a decision?
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>>>
>>> so the strange thing is that this is *explicitly* implemented in
>>> SqNumberParser to not allow 2.0s
>>>
>>> - do not allow single s without following digits as ScaledDecimal
>>>
>>> It is not explained why this is a good idea.
>>>
>>> In general, we need to merge the whole NumberParser hierarchy into one
>>> class, i don't understand why we have three classes now.
>>>
>>
>
