Talk:Generate lower case ASCII alphabet: Difference between revisions

 
Line 6:
 
"It's bug prone to enumerate all the lowercase chars manually in the code." I disagree with this pretty strongly. If the intent is to disallow such things as strings and literal lists of the 26 letters, that's fine, but it could be a little more clear. "During code review it's not immediate to spot the bug in a Tcl line like this contained in a page of code:" You don't even have to be able to program or know what ASCII is to spot that error, just know your (English) alphabet. An off by one error or a < instead of <= on the other hand can elude the best of us at times. I would drop the editorializing and just clarify that literals of the full alphabet are disallowed. &mdash;[[User:Sonia|Sonia]] ([[User talk:Sonia|talk]]) 17:18, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 
== ASCII alphabet vs. EBCDIC vs. Latin (English) alphabet ==
I assume you meant a lowercase Latin (or English) alphabet. &nbsp; Other than the internal coding of the character (or rather, the lowercase letters), &nbsp; the glyphs (depending on the code page) aren't any different then an &nbsp; '''EBCDIC''' &nbsp; version. &nbsp; Generating the same lowercase letter sequence in '''EBCDIC''' doesn't &nbsp; ''define'' &nbsp; it as a lowercase '''EBCDIC''' sequence.
 
After saying that, a Latin (or English) alphabet may however, display differently, depending upon what code page is being used. &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 23:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 
 
As to the &nbsp; &nbsp; ''use a reliable style of coding'' &nbsp; &nbsp; phrase, I interpreted that to mean to code the program in such a way to not assume that the lowercase letters may not be contiguous on other systems, and that the programer should test if a particular character is indeed, a lowercase character. &nbsp; -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 23:04, 7 April 2016 (UTC)