Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:90696 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 89154 invoked from network); 18 Jan 2016 12:43:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 18 Jan 2016 12:43:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 217.147.176.204 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.147.176.204 mail4.serversure.net Linux 2.6 Received: from [217.147.176.204] ([217.147.176.204:53633] helo=mail4.serversure.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 60/49-20254-D0EDC965 for ; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:43:58 -0500 Received: (qmail 6976 invoked by uid 89); 18 Jan 2016 12:43:54 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.3.1 ppid: 6970, pid: 6973, t: 0.0748s scanners: attach: 1.3.1 clamav: 0.96/m:52/d:10677 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.0.7?) (lester@rainbowdigitalmedia.org.uk@81.138.11.136) by mail4.serversure.net with ESMTPA; 18 Jan 2016 12:43:54 -0000 To: internals@lists.php.net References: <569CD913.8070102@lsces.co.uk> Message-ID: <569CDE0A.4050503@lsces.co.uk> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:43:54 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: [RFC][VOTE] Number Format Separator From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) On 18/01/16 12:25, Leigh wrote: > My main need would be hexadecimal code > which is not covered, so I still need the alternate hacks anyway. > > Hex is covered, see the first examples in the "Proposal" section Sorry getting mixed up ;) Can't use the 0x in some areas, so one ends up with an alternate method of adding the data as hex ... with it's own separator ... but for the life of me I can't find why we had to do that now. This may be down to BIGINT and 64bit numbers in databases ... that is where the data ends up and I know the 0x was a problem - or was it octal input -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk