Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

This limit seems a bit strange though: console.log(new Intl.NumberFormat('en', { maximumFractionDigits: 20 }).format(-0.03)); Result: -0.0333 That's actually two digits less than produced by the default ES serialization. "maximumFractionDigits" is limited

Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

On Jan 21, 2019, at 07:03, Anders Rundgren wrote: > > coming IETF standard We don’t know that yet. Grüße, Carsten ___ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

On 2019-01-21 06:54, Ethan Resnick wrote: if you input this in a browser debugger it will indeed respond with the same 21 [sort of] significant digits 0 I'm pretty sure the 0s don't count as significant digits (and,

Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

> > if you input this in a browser debugger it will indeed respond with the > same 21 [sort of] significant digits > 0 I'm pretty sure the 0s don't count as significant digits (and, with floating point numbers, it makes sense

Re: PSA: You can find existing proposals at https://github.com/tc39/proposals

There's also https://prop-tc39.now.sh/, which is much more readable. It generates it's content by scraping the GitHub pages, so should usually be up to date On Jan 20 2019, at 12:35 pm, Isiah Meadows wrote: > Not TC39, so don't read this as official communication. > > I've lately been seeing

Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

It does seem unclear why the limit is 21. Is that maybe the most you need to uniquely stringify any double value? > an only encode up to 17 significant decimal digits That's true for decimal values, but the limit of 21 would also include the fractional portion of the double value as well, so

Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

I feel this is probably best asked at https://github.com/tc39/ecma402, since it seems to imply a potential spec bug. - Isiah Meadows cont...@isiahmeadows.com www.isiahmeadows.com On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 2:31 PM Anders Rundgren < anders.rundgren@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2019-01-20 20:18,

Re: NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

On 2019-01-20 20:18, Ethan Resnick wrote: Hi, Apologies if es-discuss is the wrong venue for this; I've tried first poring through the specs and asking online to no avail. My question is: why is the limit for the `maximumSignificantDigits` option in the `NumberFormat` API set at 21? This

NumberFormat maxSignificantDigits Limit

Hi, Apologies if es-discuss is the wrong venue for this; I've tried first poring through the specs and asking online to no avail. My question is: why is the limit for the `maximumSignificantDigits` option in the `NumberFormat` API set at 21? This seems rather arbitrary — and especially odd to me

Re: Re: Proposal: enhanced case clause

Good Idea, thank you for answer, I will do it :) 2019년 1월 20일 (일) 오후 6:01에 Isiah Meadows 님이 작성: > I'd say the best way is to just file an issue. > > - > > Isiah Meadows > cont...@isiahmeadows.com > www.isiahmeadows.com > > > On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 3:59 AM Sm In wrote: > >> Thank you for

Re: Re: Proposal: enhanced case clause

I'd say the best way is to just file an issue. - Isiah Meadows cont...@isiahmeadows.com www.isiahmeadows.com On Sun, Jan 20, 2019 at 3:59 AM Sm In wrote: > Thank you for answer, I've checked thart proposal before. > As I know, proposal-pattern-matching contains guards(which checkes

Re: Re: Proposal: enhanced case clause

Thank you for answer, I've checked thart proposal before. As I know, proposal-pattern-matching contains guards(which checkes value's property) Yes, this proposal's new sementic seems duplicate pattern match's guard. But, As I know, the guard can be associcated with only one pattern. here is an