Subject: Re: [OpenJade] Bugfix for +/- vs. length-specs From: Matthias Clasen <clasen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 16:44:17 +0200 |
> I'm not sure there is a bug here. 12.5.2 seems to say that + and - are only > overloaded for length-specs when every argument is a length-spec. It looks > to me like you are trying to elide that check. (I lost the original message > but, as I recall, this started because someone complained because + didn't > work as expected when applied to a length-spec and a non-length spec.) > No, to cite 12.5.2: These procedures behave in the same way as their counterparts on quantities, except that they shall return a length-spec if any of their arguments is a ^^^ length-spec (as opposed to just a length). Its any, not every. -- Matthias Clasen, Tel. 0761/203-5606 Email: clasen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Mathematisches Institut, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitaet Freiburg DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [OpenJade] Bugfix for +/- vs. l, Matthias Clasen | Thread | page-sequence and modes., Jany Quintard |
RE: Generating high-level formattin, Didier PH Martin | Date | Re: [OpenJade] Bugfix for +/- vs. l, Matthias Clasen |
Month |