Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Warning: Tree raster can hang you

[Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <gaia@xxxxxx>]

On Sun, Jul 16, 2000 at 06:09:11AM +0300, Tuomas J. Lukka wrote:
> But there's a standards problem: some people have used
> 
> 	0.1
> 	0.2
> 	0.3
> ...
> 	0.9
> 	0.10
> 	0.11
> 
> and other use them as numbers; 0.11 is between 0.1 and 0.2.
> It's common enough to make me want to avoid it.

True.  Nevertheless, in my own programs I've used the first scheme with
no problems.

> > (Think of 0.10 being newer than 0.9.)
> 
> Yuck. NEVER.

What's the problem (beyond the above)?  You just need to consider the
version number as consisting of period-separated natural number fields.

This is, for example, the version scheme imposed by dpkg on packages
(except that dpkg uses alphanumeric fields).

> > > 0.0.1: I dislike non-floating-point versions.
> > 
> > And I dislike floating-point versions :-)
> 
> For what reason?

I'll quote you: "yuck".  It's a personal preference.

> > > Any reason in particular to use those?
> > 
> > It's just that it's more standard.  (At least where I come from.)
> 
> 0.01 is pretty much standard on CPAN.

Perl (including the stuff on CPAN) is about the only one using this
style, AFAIK.

Anyway, it's your and Ted's call.
-- 
%%% Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho % gaia@xxxxxx % http://www.iki.fi/gaia/ %%%