Luke Palmer wrote:
On 8/16/05, Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
1_234; # surely 1234
1e23; # surely 1 * 10**23
1._5; # call of method "_5" on 1?
1._foo; # call of method "_foo" on 1?
1.e5; # 1.0 * 10**5?
1.efoo; # call of method "efoo" on 1?
1.e_foo; # call of method "e_foo" on 1?
0xFF.dead; # call of method "dead" on 0xFF?
I think we should go with the method call semantics in all of the
ambiguous forms, mostly because "no such method: Int::e5" is clearer
than silently succeeding and the error coming up somewhere else.
Luke
1.e5 # all of these...
1._e5 #
1._0e5 #
1.e_0_5_ # == 1 * 10^5?
The longest-possible-token metarule, common among languages, would want
all of these to be numbers. I see that perl5's lexer has this rule (3rd
edition, p49); is not perl6's specced to have it as well?
Likewise, if hex numbers allow fractions,
0xDE_AD.BE_EF # 57005.7458343505859375 ?
0xde_ad.be_ef # same
should be taken as a number. (Naturally 'e' as exponent marker is here
problematic.)
If one wants to call a method on a number, surely one may follow the
usual advise and write
1 ._5
1 ._foo
1 .efoo
1 .e_foo
0xFF .dead
?
-- Roger Hale
