On 26 Feb 2014, at 23:08, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:
That's exactly for this kind of reasons that I developped an ExtendedNumberParser connected to Number class>>readFrom:, to allow a variety of formats used in the rest of the world.
It would have been easy to allow upper letter exponents in this parser, but the class was considered superfluous and removed from Pharo 3.0â¦
Nicolas to explain a bit the removal of that class. I do not think that Java has three different parser for number in its core or ruby?
From a maintenance perspective this is a lot of stress on us (not only at the code level the conceptually). If we do not have a guy like you taking care of such issues in Pharo daily how can we continue maintaining different parser? This is why we should simplifiy. Why this is the not the job of a GemstoneToPharoPharo to do that? Or ExternalNumberParser (to me it if conceptually different than ExtendedNumberParser) and it should be packaged somewhere else. We got at least two ASTs, three parsers and this cannot be.
Stef
2014-02-26 22:38 GMT+01:00 Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com>: Hi guys,
When I export SmallDoubles with SIXX in GemStone it generates something like this:
<sixx.object sixx.id="15" sixx.name="close" sixx.type="SmallDouble" >1.0000000000000000E-02</sixx.object>
This is because "0.01 asString" -> '1.0000000000000000E-02'
Then I want to load this in Pharo. So first problem is that of course SmallDouble doesn't exist. So I did:
aSixxShapeChangeStream shapeChangers at: #SmallDouble put: Float.
But then, SIXX use Float >> readFrom: aStream "Answer a new Float as described on the stream, aStream."
^(super readFrom: aStream) asFloat
So, of course " Float readFrom: '1.0000000000000000E-02' " -> 1.0
So my 0.01 in gemstone become 1.0 in Pharo....
Am I doing something wrong or this is expected? What is the best workaround?
In GemStone I could print the SmallDouble in the XML with a method like
Float >> xmlRepresentation ^ String streamContents: [:strm | self printOn: strm base: 10]
Is this the correct approach? If true, I guess I should define:
Float >> sixxContentOn: aStream indent: level context: dictionary aStream nextPutAll: self xmlRepresentation
Thoughts?
Thanks in advance,
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com