Chas. Owens wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 00:08, Rick wrote:
snip
It's very weird. I did verify that it is numeric values that I am
comparing... also i am using warnings and strict as well and i get no
warnings.
can't figure out what's wrong.
snip
In cases like this it is best to try
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 00:08, Rick wrote:
snip
> It's very weird. I did verify that it is numeric values that I am
> comparing... also i am using warnings and strict as well and i get no
> warnings.
> can't figure out what's wrong.
snip
In cases like this it is best to try to reproduce your prob
John W. Krahn wrote:
Rick wrote:
John W. Krahn wrote:
Rick wrote:
should this not work?
Based upon the code presented, it looks like the code it correct.
I am finding out that Length is *NOT* being sorted correctly
numerically...
Of course we don't know the data stored in %in_array and %
Rick wrote:
John W. Krahn wrote:
Rick wrote:
should this not work?
Based upon the code presented, it looks like the code it correct.
I am finding out that Length is *NOT* being sorted correctly
numerically...
Of course we don't know the data stored in %in_array and %in_array_c
so it is h
John W. Krahn wrote:
Rick wrote:
should this not work?
Based upon the code presented, it looks like the code it correct.
I am finding out that Length is *NOT* being sorted correctly
numerically...
Of course we don't know the data stored in %in_array and %in_array_c
so it is hard to say wh
Rick wrote:
should this not work?
Based upon the code presented, it looks like the code it correct.
I am finding out that Length is *NOT* being sorted correctly numerically...
Of course we don't know the data stored in %in_array and %in_array_c so
it is hard to say why it is not working th
