I'm working on modernizing Rosetta Code's infrastructure. Starting with communications. Please accept this time-limited open invite to RC's Slack.. --Michael Mol (talk) 20:59, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Validate International Securities Identification Number

From Rosetta Code

Dup?[edit]

Is this a duplicate of Luhn_test_of_credit_card_numbers?

If not, what is the task? --Rdm (talk) 07:22, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Rdm. I should have spotted the connection with Luhn. The difference is that ISINs can contain alphabetic characters, which must be translated to digits before a Luhn checksum is calculated. CUSIP, the North American stock codes, are shorter but otherwise use the same algorithm as ISINs. I couldn't see a Rosetta page for them.

There is another page on Rosetta for SEDOLs, which use the same letter-to-number technique, but thereafter use a different checksum algorithm, not Luhn.

So I think there is a point in having an ISIN page. What do you think?

--TheWombat (talk) 00:05, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Any of these sound like they would work. Another possibility might be to mark pages with something like Category: Checksums (very broad) or Category: Digit Checksums, or something like that.
That said, note that in my previous reading I did not pick up that letters were being included in the checksum, using a "base 36" sort of mechanism.
Anyways, I do not have any real strong opinions on this topic. I guess just proceed how you like and see if anyone else weighs in? --Rdm (talk) 09:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Adding an example[edit]

I suggest adding an ISIN ending in 0, as it may show a bug in the implementation. For instance, I had the (bad) idea to replace x==(-y)%10 with 10-x==y%10 in the Python implementation (where x and y are expressions in the Python code, and x is the last digit). This transformation is of course wrong, but it fails only when x=0. I have found several valid ISIN ending in 0, here is one: FR0000988040 (from HSBC I think).

Arbautjc (talk) 10:55, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I just did a complete rewrite of the task description anyway, and used this opportunity to add your suggested test-case. --Smls (talk) 12:30, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! I'll edit the Python implementation. Arbautjc (talk) 13:32, 7 August 2016 (UTC)