Re: String concatenation design
- From: "Barry" <barryg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 06:26:16 -0600
"Barry" <barryg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:122nfiira6b9l3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
be
<andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1143553103.017921.221240@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Barry wrote:
<andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1143540676.814646.118800@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Anton Treuenfels wrote:
I have a numeric expression parser that allows literal strings to
precedencethoseused in
logical expressions (such as comparisons) because the results of
are
numeric. I gave the relevant string operators a very high
Actually, I should have said the result is an int. It doesn't "return"engagingbecause
that seemed the easiest way to prevent numeric operators from
string operands.
So the expression
"ABC" < "DEF" + 1
is parsed as
("ABC" < "DEF") + 1
and yields the value 2.
why does boolean + numeric -> numeric.
boolean + numeric could go to boolean or be disallowed IMO.
Or is the current semantic particularly useful and if so where?
regards
Andy Little
Who said anything about booleans?
What else should a less-than comparison return?
cheers
Andy Little
In C it returns an int, in perl it is just a scalar.
anything :-).
.
- References:
- String concatenation design
- From: Anton Treuenfels
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: andy
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Barry
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: andy
- Re: String concatenation design
- From: Barry
- String concatenation design
- Prev by Date: Re: String concatenation design
- Next by Date: Re: find a number
- Previous by thread: Re: String concatenation design
- Next by thread: Re: String concatenation design
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|