[ic] [interchange] Add numeric ordercheck
mike at perusion.com
Thu Mar 25 16:28:48 UTC 2010
Quoting Jon Jensen (jon at endpoint.com):
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2010, Mike Heins wrote:
> >Hmm. This is no definition of numeric I know of.
> >If it is for a SQL purpose, perhaps. I don't know enough to check that.
> >I will tell you MySQL and Postgres both accept +1, 1. and .1 just fine,
> >as does Perl.
> Yes, we considered those but decided to make the check restrictive at
> least to start with. We can loosen it up if needed.
> The idea was that if validating a numeric entry from a customer, 1. is
> almost certainly missing something, +1 is not likely intentional, and .1
> we were on the fence about -- some cases it might be intentional, other
> times a mistake.
> >I think perhaps I would prefer:
> > use Scalar::Util qw/looks_like_number/;
> I could see using that. Ton, what do you think?
It's just that if we are going to put it in the distribution, we should
correspond to an accepted definition of numeric or change the name to
something that shows it isn't really numeric, but a modified definition.
Someone could easily spin their wheels thinking that something else was
wrong, when it was just an unannounced and idiosyncratic definition of
Perusion -- Expert Interchange Consulting http://www.perusion.com/
phone +1.765.328.4479 <mike at perusion.com>
Life is a long lesson in humility. -- James Barrie
More information about the interchange-users