Talk:Range extraction: Difference between revisions

Talk:Range extraction (view source)

5 bytes added , 4 years ago

m

fixed typo.

Anonymous user

Revision as of 16:45, 19 April 2013 (view source) rosettacode>Paddy3118 (→‎prime number musing: Sorry.) ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 21:03, 6 August 2019 (view source) rosettacode>Gerard Schildberger m (fixed typo.)
(3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: == Might I suggest ...== Might I suggest breaking the format description out to a separate page and transcluding it both here and in [[Range expansion]]? --[[User:Short Circuit\|Michael Mol]] 00:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC) Line 57 ⟶ 58: ==Comment in Ada solution on notation== :''"For real-life applications it is better to use the notation -9..-4"'' True. if I were doing this for real then I would have liked to use a different range indication character, but, as in so many things, I modified/simplified an [http://www~~-cecpv~~.~~u-strasbg~~ccs.frmiami.edu/~~Documentations~~hpc/lsf/~~html/lsf6~~7.~~1_admin~~0.6/admin/~~G_jobarrays~~jobarrays.html#~~32777~~wp1004400 existing format that used dashes], to allow negative numbers - hence the compromise. (On seeing how easy it was to parse I left it in). ==TUSCRIPT example==