The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Integer with base preserved!
 There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic. There was an error processing your request. Please try again. Standard view   View as tree
 Messages 26 - 50 of 54 < Older  Newer >

From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Subject:
 Validation: For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon.

More options Jan 23 2004, 9:49 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 14:40:01 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 9:40 am
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Pascal Bourguignon wrote:

[various other people:]

> > > six hundred sixty-nine million, one hundred fifty-five thousand, three
> > > hundred eighty-six and three tenths

> > That's true in US English. It's not true in British English.
> > In the absence of a clear indication of which variety of English
> > Pascal was intending to write, it's not reasonable to dismiss
> > what he wrote as "wrong".

[Pascal:]

> I don't know, what are the  difference in English and US numbers?  But
> it does not  matter, at least lisp ~R is consistent  and it parsed the
> numbers and formated the output in the same language.

British English puts an "and" in the construction "--- hundred and ---"
where US English doesn't. At one time British English defined
1 million = 10^6, 1 billion = 10^12, 1 trillion = 10^18, etc,
but now just about everyone in the UK uses the US convention that
1 thousand = 10^3, 1 million = 10^6, 1 billion = 10^9, 1 trillion = 10^12, etc.
There might be some minor differences in hyphenation or something, but
that's basically it.

--
Gareth McCaughan
.sig under construc

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 9:50 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 14:50:13 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 9:50 am
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!
I have been informed that the British have taken up bad habits from
American English and use «billion» to refer to both «thousand million»
and «million million» with no other way to distinguish them than to
think about the values and reject one of the two meanings intuitively.

This and the Fred Flintstone Units ought to relegate English to the
garbage dump of history.  Just re-elect George W. Bush and be done
with it, OK?

--
Erik Naggum, disillusioned in Oslo, Norway

Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder.
Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 11:34 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 16:28:05 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 11:28 am
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> writes:
>   I have been informed that the British have taken up bad habits from
>   American English and use «billion» to refer to both «thousand million»
>   and «million million» with no other way to distinguish them than to
>   think about the values and reject one of the two meanings intuitively.

I can't remember the last time I heard "billion" used to mean
"million million", so I don't think this is a serious practical
problem. It's ugly, though.

>   This and the Fred Flintstone Units ought to relegate English to the
>   garbage dump of history.  Just re-elect George W. Bush and be done
>   with it, OK?

Re-electing Dubya might consign too many other things to the
garbage dump of history, or for that matter to any convenient
garbage dump, so despite the antiquaronian charmulation of
his peculiatory manner of speakitude I'm not inclined to
accept your suggestion. Anyway, there's not a whole lot I
can do to get him elected or unelected. (If his first "election"
is anything to go by, there may not be much any voter can do.)

Um. I've been involved in one political flamefest in c.l.l
already this month. I'd better stop.

--
Gareth McCaughan
.sig under construc

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 11:35 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:01:41 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 11:01 am
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

* Erik Naggum wrote:
>   I have been informed that the British have taken up bad habits from
>   American English and use «billion» to refer to both «thousand million»
>   and «million million» with no other way to distinguish them than to
>   think about the values and reject one of the two meanings intuitively.

I don't think we do that.  I think we've changed from an old
convention where a billion was a million million to a new one where a
billion is a thousand million.  There has probably been (well: has
certainly been) some confusion during the change, and there are no
doubt holdouts who insist on the old usage, but I don't think that
both usages can be used at once.

--tim

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 12:14 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Joe Marshall <j...@ccs.neu.edu>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:14:28 -0500
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 12:14 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> writes:
> * Pascal Bourguignon
> | I don't know, what are the  difference in English and US numbers?

>   The English-speaking part of the world have enormous problem counting
>   any higher than 20, which explains their Fred Flintstone Units and
>   their irrational resistance to units

Irrational?!  The english standard of measurement is nothing *but*
rational:

1/8 mile per furlong
1/10 furlong per chain
1/4 chain per rod
1/3 yard per foot
1/12 foot per inch
1/3 inch per barleycorn

All sorts of ratios.

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 1:13 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: raff...@mediaone.net (Raffael Cavallaro)
Date: 23 Jan 2004 10:13:28 -0800
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 1:13 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

There is no "absence of a clear indication of which variety of English
Pascal was intending to write." His code uses ~r. See:

We're talking about ANSI Common Lisp. These US centric conventions are
only to be expected - the "A" in ANSI is for "American" after all, and
ANSI's "mission is to enhance both the global competitiveness of U.S.
business and the U.S. quality of life by promoting and facilitating
voluntary consensus standards and conformity assessment systems, and
safeguarding their integrity."

That quote makes me sound rather jingoistic (FWIW I'm not - I oppose
the Bush manufactured war in Iraq for example) but this is simply a
matter of portability and standard conformance. Pascal's code is
broken under a strictly conforming implementation since the input
string will never be string-equal to that generated by the do loop
when the input string is greater than 99 in US English (as one would
expect with *ANSI* Common Lisp) and the implementation outputs UK
English for ~r directives.

It makes little sense for a format directive in the ANSI standard to
use UK English for formatting integers to words.

So this is not really Pascal's fault- I think his implementation is
non conforming. Under sbcl, or OpenMCL, I get no "and" between whole
number groups. Under clisp, and LispWorks however, I do, so I conclude
that he is using an implementation that is non conforming in this
respect.

Execute this:
(format t "~r" '123456789)
and you'll know whether your implementation gets this right or not.

raf

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 1:50 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Kenny Tilton <ktil...@nyc.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 18:47:35 GMT
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 1:47 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Gareth McCaughan wrote:

> Re-electing Dubya might consign too many other things to the
> garbage dump of history, or for that matter to any convenient
> garbage dump, so despite the antiquaronian charmulation of
> his peculiatory manner of speakitude I'm not inclined to
> accept your suggestion. Anyway, there's not a whole lot I
> can do to get him elected or unelected. (If his first "election"
> is anything to go by, there may not be much any voter can do.)

> Um. I've been involved in one political flamefest in c.l.l
> already this month. I'd better stop.

discussion of headscarf education have created the illusion that c.l.l.
is a fine place to swap recipes for vegetables and debate American
presidential politics (so you cannot claim it is of interest to anyone
but the candidates, whom I have not seen here lately) and anything else
you spot in the morning paper. Don't stop now, just as you are on the
verge of success. One or two more threads like the one on math education
and the precedent will be firmly in place, and there will be no danger
anyone getting curious about Lisp will find here anything other than a
bunch of self-appointed experts spouting endlessly on everything but
Lisp. They will conclude they were right in the first place, Lisp is
dead, can't even support a proper newsgroup.

Hey, what do you think, is it for real this time, the Ben&Jen breakup

:)?

kenny

ps. Three hundred words on dubbya followed by "I'd better stop" is what
we call a non-stopping stop.

k

--

clinisys, inc
http://www.tilton-technology.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------
"[If anyone really has healing powers,] I would like to call
--  Tenzin Gyatso, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 2:04 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 18:51:29 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 1:51 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Raffael Cavallaro wrote:

[I said:]

The ANSI standard does not mandate that ~R produce output in
US English rather than British English. You might as well
argue that CLISP is non-conformant because it displays a
menorah at startup and the menorah is a Jewish rather than
an American symbol.

a Bad Thing that CLISP displays a menorah, earlier this
year; let's not revisit that. I hope you agree that it's
clearly not a violation of conformance.)

The standard is, in fact, very unspecific about just what ~R
should do with large numbers. I can only assume that it's
deliberately so. CLTL2 (of interest as a historical document,
at least) goes into a bit more detail, indicating that its
author did not consider that there is only one right way for
~R to render numbers in "English" and did consider it worth
not ignoring British English when deciding what conventions
to use.

--
Gareth McCaughan
.sig under construc

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 2:19 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Nils Goesche <car...@cartan.de>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 20:19:27 +0100
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 2:19 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com> writes:
> The ANSI standard does not mandate that ~R produce output in US
> English rather than British English. You might as well argue that
> CLISP is non-conformant because it displays a menorah at startup and
> the menorah is a Jewish rather than an American symbol.

Who knows -- if the ANSI Standard was written by good Christians,
there would be 12 special operators, not 25, of course.

Identifying, excruciating and bonfiring the Satanic Special Operators
is left as an exercise for the Schemers.

Regards,
--
Nils Gösche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."

PGP key ID 0x0655CFA0

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 2:22 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Nils Goesche <car...@cartan.de>
Date: 23 Jan 2004 20:22:31 +0100
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 2:22 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

I wrote:
> Who knows -- if the ANSI Standard was written by good Christians,
> there would be 12 special operators, not 25, of course.

> Identifying, excruciating and bonfiring the Satanic Special Operators
> is left as an exercise for the Schemers.

I think I have a proof that there are exactly 13 Satanic Special
Operators, but there is not enough room in a single USENET posting to
prove this.

Regards,
--
Nils Gösche
"Don't ask for whom the <CTRL-G> tolls."

PGP key ID 0x0655CFA0

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 2:25 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Alan Shutko <a...@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 13:20:34 -0600
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 2:20 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com> writes:
> Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavall...@junk.mail.me.not.mac.com> writes:
>> FWIW, the above output is wrong - "and" should only be used between the
>> whole number and fractional parts, e.g.
> That's true in US English. It's not true in British English.

FWIW, it's not even universally accepted in US English.  School
teachers in some areas (at some times) pushed it strongly, others
don't care.

--
Alan Shutko <a...@acm.org> - I am the rocks.
Before the Borg, there were the fundies.

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 2:41 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: t...@famine.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick)
Date: 23 Jan 2004 11:41:32 -0800
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 2:41 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no> writes:
>   Fred Flintstone Units

They're actually nice round binary numbers (except for the tsp/Tbls
transition).  Eg:

11 tsp   = 1 Tbls
100 Tbls = 1 Cup
10 Cups  = 1 Pint
100 Cups = 1 Quart
100 Quarts = 1 Gallon

So maybe Robby The Robot Units is more like it

--
/|_     .-----------------------.
,'  .\  / | No to Imperialist war |
,--'    _,'   | Wage class war!       |
/       /      `-----------------------'
(   -.  |
|     ) |
(`-.  '--.)
`. )----'

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 4:09 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Joe Marshall <j...@ccs.neu.edu>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 16:09:45 -0500
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 4:09 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Nils Goesche <car...@cartan.de> writes:
> Who knows -- if the ANSI Standard was written by good Christians,
> there would be 12 special operators, not 25, of course.

> Identifying, excruciating and bonfiring the Satanic Special Operators
> is left as an exercise for the Schemers.

I wasn't expecting the Spanish Inquisition....

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 6:11 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: raff...@mediaone.net (Raffael Cavallaro)
Date: 23 Jan 2004 15:11:16 -0800
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 6:11 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com> wrote in message <news:87fze6qz0u.fsf@g.mccaughan.ntlworld.com>...
> The ANSI standard does not mandate that ~R produce output in
> US English rather than British English.

<sarcasm>It doesn't specifically exclude 1337 sp34k either, so I guess
that would be conforming as well.</sarcasm>
Again, it is just bizarre to assume that the format conventions in the
ANSI standard should be UK English, and not US English, since ANSI is
a US standards body.

> You might as well
> argue that CLISP is non-conformant because it displays a
> menorah at startup and the menorah is a Jewish rather than
> an American symbol.

So you hope here to associate me with the anti-Semites who posted to
that thread? I avoided that one intentionally, but as far as I'm
concerned, the maintainers of clisp have every right to print whatever
welcome banner they want - they could even print quotations from the
Torah in Hebrew, or access your sound card and start playing havah
nagilah if they like. They have graciously provided an extremely
portable common lisp implementation for free (in both senses), so I am
merely grateful to them, whatever welcome banner they choose to
present.

I do however believe that US English for ~r format directives would be
more conforming than their current use of UK English. Ditto LispWorks.

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 6:21 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Date: 24 Jan 2004 00:21:25 +0100
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 6:21 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

It would have been neat if conforming lisps would have been allowed to
use as output language for the ~R directive the i18n-specified
language for that platform, eg on Unix it would use language
information from the LC_*/LANG environment variables. Sadly, such an
extension would be non-conforming though, since the standard
explicitly mentions English. :-(

Björn

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 6:29 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Peter Seibel <pe...@javamonkey.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 23:28:22 GMT
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 6:28 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Ah, there's a loophole--*English* doesn't have a standard!

-Peter

--
Peter Seibel                                      pe...@javamonkey.com

Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 7:19 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 00:03:35 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 7:03 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Raffael Cavallaro wrote:

[I said:]

>> The ANSI standard does not mandate that ~R produce output in
>> US English rather than British English.

> <sarcasm>It doesn't specifically exclude 1337 sp34k either, so I guess
> that would be conforming as well.</sarcasm>

Gosh, I'm glad you put that inside <sarcasm /> tags; I'd never
have noticed otherwise. If there's a serious point there, I'm
unable to work out what it is. (Unless you think that the variety
of English spoken and written in, um, England, is as far from
being correctly called "English" simpliciter as 1337 5p34k is.)

> Again, it is just bizarre to assume that the format conventions in the
> ANSI standard should be UK English, and not US English, since ANSI is
> a US standards body.

I didn't say that they *should be* UK English and not US English.
I said that they *may be* if the implementors choose it, at any
point where that is permitted by the standard.

I'll go further out on a limb and mention my shocking opinion
that it is not wrong for localized versions of CL implementations
to be produced, that generate (for instance) error messages in
a language other than English. Nor is it wrong for companies
not based in the US to make money out of selling CL implementations,
despite your astute observation that ANSI exists to further the

Oh, sorry, should I have wrapped that in "<sarcasm>...</sarcasm>"?

>> You might as well
>> argue that CLISP is non-conformant because it displays a
>> menorah at startup and the menorah is a Jewish rather than
>> an American symbol.

> So you hope here to associate me with the anti-Semites who posted to

No: I have absolutely no such intention. (Nor, for the record,
do I think that wishing CLISP didn't display a menorah at
startup implies anti-semitism.)

>              I avoided that one intentionally, but as far as I'm
> concerned, the maintainers of clisp have every right to print whatever
> welcome banner they want - they could even print quotations from the
> Torah in Hebrew, or access your sound card and start playing havah
> nagilah if they like. They have graciously provided an extremely
> portable common lisp implementation for free (in both senses), so I am
> merely grateful to them, whatever welcome banner they choose to
> present.

Good; we are agreed.

> I do however believe that US English for ~r format directives would be
> more conforming than their current use of UK English. Ditto LispWorks.

I think you are using "conforming" in a very strange sense.

--
Gareth McCaughan
.sig under construc

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 7:19 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 00:10:53 +0000
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 7:10 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Björn Lindberg wrote:

[I said:]

> > The standard is, in fact, very unspecific about just what ~R
> > should do with large numbers. I can only assume that it's
> > deliberately so. CLTL2 (of interest as a historical document,
> > at least) goes into a bit more detail, indicating that its
> > author did not consider that there is only one right way for
> > ~R to render numbers in "English" and did consider it worth
> > not ignoring British English when deciding what conventions
> > to use.

[Björn:]

> It would have been neat if conforming lisps would have been allowed to
> use as output language for the ~R directive the i18n-specified
> language for that platform, eg on Unix it would use language
> information from the LC_*/LANG environment variables. Sadly, such an
> extension would be non-conforming though, since the standard
> explicitly mentions English. :-(

Yep. But I think it might be allowable to have a special
mode in which ~R uses the local language. Just make sure
it's triggered by something whose effects are explicitly
undefined by the standard :-).

--
Gareth McCaughan
.sig under construc

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 9:28 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Pascal Bourguignon <s...@thalassa.informatimago.com>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 03:26:54 +0100
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

> * Erik Naggum wrote:
> >   I have been informed that the British have taken up bad habits from
> >   American English and use «billion» to refer to both «thousand million»
> >   and «million million» with no other way to distinguish them than to
> >   think about the values and reject one of the two meanings intuitively.

> I don't think we do that.  I think we've changed from an old
> convention where a billion was a million million to a new one where a
> billion is a thousand million.  There has probably been (well: has
> certainly been) some confusion during the change, and there are no
> doubt holdouts who insist on the old usage, but I don't think that
> both usages can be used at once.

If that's so, perhaps that's the reason why Beagle 2 is not responding!

The S.I.¹ is the only way to the stars. ;-)

¹) Système Internationnal d'Unités  http://www.bipm.org/en/si/

--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 9:40 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Pascal Bourguignon <s...@thalassa.informatimago.com>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 03:38:34 +0100
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 9:38 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Good. CLHS says:

~nR prints arg in radix n. The modifier flags and any remaining
parameters are used as for the ~D directive. ~D is the same as
~10R. The full form is

If no prefix parameters are given to ~R, then a different
interpretation is given. The argument should be an integer. For
example, if arg is 4:

* ~R prints arg as a cardinal English number: four.

* ~:R prints arg as an ordinal English number: fourth.

* ~@R prints arg as a Roman numeral: IV.

* ~:@R prints arg as an old Roman numeral: IIII.

Did  it means  that any  kind  of English  is good,  or should  Oxford
English be used or New York English or Canberra English?

Clisp sounds schizophrenic:

[15]> (format t "~R~%" 1000000110)
one billion, one hundred and ten
NIL

or really up to date if really England usage now is to use billion for 1e9.

SBCL, cmucl and openmcl sound American:

* (format t "~R~%" 1000000110)
one billion one hundred ten
NIL

Perhaps of just refering to  "English number" it should have specified
explicitely the rules to generate the string from the numbers?

--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 10:00 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Pascal Bourguignon <s...@thalassa.informatimago.com>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 03:59:00 +0100
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

No jingoism, that's just what standards are about. :-)

> ...
> > It makes little sense for a format directive in the ANSI standard to
> > use UK English for formatting integers to words.

I understand it so.

In  that  case,  they  should  have  specified  "human  language"  and
localization, and  stuff like that. (I'd  be happy to be  able to setf
some global  variable to get "un  billion" for 1e12).   Since they did
not,  I would  interpret it  to be  requiring strict  American English
output. (And indeed clisp, being of European origin uses wrongly a mix
of American and British English here).

--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 23 2004, 10:03 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Pascal Bourguignon <s...@thalassa.informatimago.com>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 04:01:39 +0100
Local: Fri, Jan 23 2004 10:01 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

Alan Shutko <a...@acm.org> writes:
> Gareth McCaughan <gareth.mccaug...@pobox.com> writes:

> > Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavall...@junk.mail.me.not.mac.com> writes:

> >> FWIW, the above output is wrong - "and" should only be used between the
> >> whole number and fractional parts, e.g.

> > That's true in US English. It's not true in British English.

> FWIW, it's not even universally accepted in US English.  School
> teachers in some areas (at some times) pushed it strongly, others
> don't care.

Why  did  they  not specify  French?   At  least,  in France  we  have
normalizing  organizations that  edict formal  rules to  write numbers
unequivocally  (and  units too),  and  these  rules  are official  and
published in  the Journal Officiel (where  all French Laws  have to be
published to be appliable).

--
__Pascal_Bourguignon__                     http://www.informatimago.com/
There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he doesn't
want merely because you think it would be good for him.--Robert Heinlein

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 24 2004, 3:16 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Erik Naggum <e...@naggum.no>
Date: 24 Jan 2004 08:16:40 +0000
Local: Sat, Jan 24 2004 3:16 am
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!
* Björn Lindberg
| It would have been neat if conforming lisps would have been allowed to
| use as output language for the ~R directive the i18n-specified
| language for that platform, eg on Unix it would use language
| information from the LC_*/LANG environment variables.

Focusing only on the ~R is myopic.  How about ~P?

I am opposed to the whole localization and internationalization mess,
as it is done at the wrong level.  Instead of making programs use some
strings instead of some other strings, the properly language-oriented
approach uses a /protocol/ that results in improved user interaction
when the user interface module communicates with the user.  If this
protocol was properly written and published, and I do /not/ mean APIs,
users could write their own user interaction modules and could run the
software and the user agent on different computers if they wanted to.
The WWW could have offered this separation, but the promise of Java
was never realized on the client side and today's user interaction is
still controlled almost entirely by the server.  In order to design
protocols that it is possible to interact with, programmers need to
think in very different terms from designing the user interaction as
part of the application, and not having to do this is the lure of the
string-replacing method.  It is all very depressing that programming
has never evolved as a discipline that could keep the user interface
out of the application «logic», for these days, there is almost no
real software development since everybody are working on irrelevant
parts of the application.

--
Erik Naggum | Oslo, Norway

Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder.
Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 24 2004, 6:16 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: cst...@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy)
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 11:16:03 GMT
Local: Sat, Jan 24 2004 6:16 am
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!
>>>>> On 24 Jan 2004 08:16:40 +0000, Erik Naggum ("Erik") writes:

Erik>   other strings, the properly language-oriented approach uses a
Erik>   /protocol/ that results in improved user interaction when the
Erik>   user interface module communicates with the user.  If this
Erik>   protocol was properly written and published, and I do /not/
Erik>   mean APIs, users could write their own user interaction
Erik>   modules and could run the software and the user agent on
Erik>   different computers if they wanted to.

Erik>   It is all very depressing that programming has never evolved
Erik>   as a discipline that could keep the user interface out of the
Erik>   application «logic», for these days

This is, in a general sense, the kind of problem that
the presentation system of CLIM is supposed to be about.

Rather than the main application programmer writing

(format t "~&~R lossage~:P" n-lossages)

he would instead define a LOSSAGE presentation type.

Then the GUI programmer would write the PRESENT methods,
multi-dispatched on the LOSSAGE class and a LOCALE.

However, that's not really how most CLIM (or DW) code that I've seen
was written.  Graphical based presentations are like that, but things
about text were not abstracted as far.

To post a message you must first join this group.
You do not have the permission required to post.
More options Jan 24 2004, 7:37 pm
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
From: Rahul Jain <rj...@nyct.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2004 19:35:46 -0500
Local: Sat, Jan 24 2004 7:35 pm
Subject: Re: Integer with base preserved!

> Hi Timothy Moore,

>> If you want presentation types, you know where to find them: CLIM. The
>> presentation type information is explicit in the program but implicit on
>> the display.

> Thanks for the tip Timothy. I haven't used CLIM and I wasn't consciously
> (mis)appropriating the term.

It's not really a misappropriation at all. You're describing exactly
what presentation types are for. That is, they have no relevance to the
processing of objects, merely to the way in which you'd like to display
it in some part of some user interface. Of course, a presentation is not
the number that it is displaying. You can't add a presentation of an
integer in hex format to another one, but you could define a
presentation-g-f that did something like that and then returned the
result as some sort of presentation, as well. What presentation type
that result would have is not at all a feature of the number system, but
rather, a feature of the user interface the application would like to
provide to the user. Thankfully, the application you choose to write is
not specified in either the CL or CLIM standards.

--
Rahul Jain
rj...@nyct.net
Professional Software Developer, Amateur Quantum Mechanicist