On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Alaric Snell-Pym <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> char-numeric? certainly seems to be of limited use without it, but >>> is the char-numeric?/digit-value pair actually useful at all in the >>> scope of WG1, given string->number? >> >> Unless we are to extend `string->number` to handle non-European >> digits (and then `read`, and then numeric literals?), I think so. >> > Well, if digit-value exists and handles all those fun cases, then I > think that read (and, therefore by definition, numeric literals), should > do so too for consistency and to avoid having to have two parallel > digit->number conversions lurking inside every implementation, one a > subset of the other. string->number and read accepting as numbers all characters satisfying the current char-numeric? would be crazy. Think roman numerals, just to take a simple example we all know about. Assuming the I are the right unicode character for the roman numeral 1: (string->number "II") ==> 2? 11? Solving this problem does not belong to a library at this level. P. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
