On Sat, 10 Sep 2011, Martin Peach wrote:
Which other ways are you thinking about, apart from something that behaves more or less like strtof ?
OK, for example an object that converts names of numbers to floats: or binary to float: or imaginary numbers: or even some kind of [expr] that takes symbolic input: None of the above would work properly with a default symbol-to-float method. Each needs to parse its input according to its own specific meaning-space.
So what's the problem with having an implicit cast that does the strtof that people want in 99,99 % of the cases, and still be able to use explicit means to convert things like MCMLXXVIII to float in whichever way you like ?
It's not about all-encompassing conversions, it's about defaults.
| Mathieu Bouchard ---- tél: +1.514.383.3801 ---- Villeray, Montréal, QC