[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Moon at SCRC-TENEX at mit-mc
- Subject: parse-number
- From: David L. Andre <DLA at SCRC-TENEX at mit-mc>
- Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1982 04:06:00 -0000
- Cc: BSG at SCRC-TENEX at mit-mc, lisp-designers at SCRC-TENEX at mit-mc, Common-Lisp at SU-AI at mit-mc
- In-reply-to: The message of 22 Dec 82 22:42-EST from David A. Moon <Moon at SCRC-TENEX>
Date: Wednesday, 22 December 1982, 22:42-EST
From: David A. Moon <Moon at SCRC-TENEX>
Date: Tuesday, 21 December 1982, 14:57-EST
From: Bernard S. Greenberg <BSG at SCRC-TENEX>
I was willing to believe that zwei appreciates the fact that
zwei:parse-number by default did not complain about non-numeric digits.
However, I refuse to believe that this is the correct default for the
now globalized parse-number, documented in the 4.0 Release Notes.
I cannot believe that the world will believe a number parsing routine
that by default does not complain about invalid numbers: the time to
fix it is now.
The Common Lisp copy of this function is compatible with this except
for the names of the arguments. But perhaps it is wrong, too? Note,
however, that READ-FROM-STRING does exactly the same thing.
No, (READ-FROM-STRING "123FOO") ==> #<INTERNED-SYMBOL 123FOO>
(PARSE-NUMBER "123FOO") ==> 123., 3
This is an artifact of FS:PARSE-NUMBER first being used to parse file
names such as "AI: LCADR; UCADR 666MCR", I believe.