[Tim]
> >>> unicodedata.numeric(u"\N{PLANCK CONSTANT OVER TWO PI}")
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
> ValueError: not a numeric character
> >>> unicodedata.numeric(u"\N{EULER CONSTANT}")
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
> ValueError: not a numeric character
> >>> unicodedata.numeric(u"\N{AIRSPEED OF AFRICAN SWALLOW}")
> UnicodeError: Unicode-Escape decoding error: Invalid Unicode
Character Name
[MAL]
> Perhaps you should submit these for Unicode 4.0 ;-)
Note that the first two are already there; they just don't have an
associated numerical value. The last one was a hint that I was trying to
write a frivolous msg while giving my "<wink>" key a break <wink>.
> But really, I don't suspect that anyone is going to do serious
> character to number conversion on these esoteric characters. Plain
> old digits will do just as they always have ...
Which is why I have to wonder whether there's *any* value in exposing the
numeric-value property beyond regular old digits.
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