On Monday, March 10, 2003, at 08:48 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
That's the reason I wrote the Number-Handling-Patch and even improved it (or better fixed it since I forgot something :).
Is this in an issue somewhere? If not please make it so. Can you set the milestone to 1.4? Geir, was this approved for inclusion? What further revision does it need?
Not for 1.4, as it has the chance of breaking lots of stuff. There's a good suggestion on how to avoid it, but there's no reason to do in 1.4 - I see 1.4 as the catchup release to get the stuff that's been done since 1.3 out, and new stuff - Number changes, Map support - as new...
Yes?
I don't think FP would break existing templates if implemented with care (although I don't see myself the necessity for them); but I just *cringe* at the idea of balooning the numeric types to BigInteger/BigDecimal's. It's just megaton-scale overkill.
I'd say that any application sensitive enough to overflow to care should implement careful (pardon the redundancy) business logic outside the template. Otherwise, every Velocity user would pay a heavy tax on the marginal gain of people that should know better than implement BigInteger factorials in Velocity.
If I'm allowed to vote, I'd
-1
on the numeric proposal as it is now.
Mat�as.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
