For the record, should we want to remove the option of having a (possible second) minus sign after the radix specification, the expression self peekSignIsMinus ifTrue: [ neg := neg not ]. should be removed from NumberParser>>#nextNumber and #nextInteger But I haven't tested this. Some unit tests might fail since this 'feature' seems to be supported explicitly.
On 15 Jan 2020, at 17:38, ducasse <stepharo@netcourrier.com> wrote:
On 15 Jan 2020, at 14:30, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Hi,
I came across the following quirk that surprised me.
Positive number in a arbitrary radix
16rA = 10
Same number but negative
-16rA = -10
I guess, we all know that.
However, the following is also possible
16r-A = -10
I would not support this one either
I did not know that, but OK.
But what about this one ?
-16r-A = 10
I understand that the double negation is positive again, but do we really want to support such a syntax ?
I would not
Sven