Re: (tye)Re2: Ordered Comparison of Generalized Version Strings.

I think yours does support differing number of digits in a part; e.g. 3.9 vs 3.10.

As for error checking, which is larger: 3.2 or 3B or i3r2 ?

Comment on Re: (tye)Re2: Ordered Comparison of Generalized Version Strings.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(tye)Re3: Ordered Comparison of Generalized Version Strings. by tye (Sage) on Jul 26, 2001 at 19:49 UTC
Yes, it supports comparing versions were 3.10 comes after 3.9 (because 3.9==3.09), but it doesn't support decimal numbers where 3.10 comes before 3.9 (because 3.9==3.90) [but if the decimal numbers that will be compared together always have the same number of digits after the decimal (as is often the case), then it works]. Obviously it can't support both version strings and all decimal numbers, I just mentioned that because it is a general-purpose "natural sort". Well, I definitely consider 3B to be a revision to the base branch and so 3B comes after 3.2. But I supposed some may disagree with me. So rejecting such comparisons is a worthwhile feature that can't be duplicated by a simpler method. (: - tye (but my friends call me "Tye")	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

(tye)Re3: Ordered Comparison of Generalized Version Strings.
by tye (Sage) on Jul 26, 2001 at 19:49 UTC

Yes, it supports comparing versions were 3.10 comes after 3.9 (because 3.9==3.09), but it doesn't support decimal numbers where 3.10 comes before 3.9 (because 3.9==3.90) [but if the decimal numbers that will be compared together always have the same number of digits after the decimal (as is often the case), then it works]. Obviously it can't support both version strings and all decimal numbers, I just mentioned that because it is a general-purpose "natural sort".

Well, I definitely consider 3B to be a revision to the base branch and so 3B comes after 3.2. But I supposed some may disagree with me. So rejecting such comparisons is a worthwhile feature that can't be duplicated by a simpler method. (:

tye

[reply]