On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 08:47:14PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2006 at 10:42:53AM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > > > I'd imagine you'd be hard pressed to find a mathematician who knows what to > > do with a number that reads 0.0.9, either. That's why we're software > > developers, not mathematicians. > > > > Or, to put it another way: your numbers are not our numbers. <grin> > > I never said I was a mathematician :-)
The royal 'your', though. > The original comparison, though, was 0.09 and 0.9. We're out to break *all* the rules. If we need to make up a new evaluation algorithm to be able to handle 0.0.1, we may as well include handling zero-padding differently as well. - Matt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
