On Sat, Nov 04, 2000 at 03:08:43PM +0100, Thomas Wouters wrote: > And the parser would have to be fixed (either rewritten into at least an > LL(2) parser, or the metagrammar hacked so that 'NUMBER' doesn't eat the . > after a number if it isn't followed by another number or whitespace.) (At > least IMHO, this isn't an insurmountable problem, or even a medium-sized > problem. It was just never necessary to fix it.) Actually, no, it isn't easily fixable, if at all. The problem is mostly the scientific notation: 1.e5 Even if it was parsed properly, it is definately going to confuse people. They wouldn't be able to say, for instance, 1.e() ;P -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4