Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.php > #9286

Re: bug in is_numeric

Message-ID <9274580.Q9cWkUkHO0@PointedEars.de> (permalink)
From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de>
Organization PointedEars Software (PES)
Date 2013-05-13 11:07 +0200
Subject Re: bug in is_numeric
Newsgroups comp.lang.php
References (4 earlier) <kmolp6$pfl$1@dont-email.me> <2674261.IiuJV7CBEH@PointedEars.de> <kmov5q$i0a$1@dont-email.me> <16716194.HF93PK6e1C@PointedEars.de> <kmpc98$gs4$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> On 5/12/2013 7:27 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 5/12/2013 2:39 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>> On 5/12/2013 1:38 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>>>> Thomas Mlynarczyk wrote:
>>>>>>> Sanders Kaufman schrieb:
>>>>>>>>> if(is_numeric('x11.11c')  returns  TRUE
>>>>>>>> Try it without the quotation marks around the number.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which number? x11.11c is not a number.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The misconception might partially draw from the fact that 0x11 is a
>>>>>> number, the hexadecimal representation of decimal 16¹ + 16⁰ = 17
>>>>>> (even in PHP).

To be clear, I was referring to *Sanders'* misconception.

>>>>>> In other programming languages that require a leading
>>>>>> “0” and do not have “.” as (concatenation) operator,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      x11.11c
>>>>>>
>>>>>> could be the representation of decimal 16¹ + 16⁰ + 16⁻¹ + 16⁻² + 13 ×
>>>>>> 16⁻³ = 17.06958 (BTW, I have written a drop-in replacement for
>>>>>> ECMAScript's parseFloat() that can do that, with the usual rounding
>>>>>> errors [1]).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In PHP, however,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      x11.11c
>>>>>>
>>>>>> would be equivalent to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      (x11) . (11c)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong, as usual.
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Intentionally misquoted, as usual.
>>>
>>> And exactly what is wrong with what I quoted?
>>
>> In contrast to what you stated, exactly *nothing* is wrong with it when
>> properly quoted; that is, *in context*, which is the point.  Giving you
>> the benefit of a doubt, you appear to have severe difficulty
>> understanding the concept of context as such and the importance of
>> context in quotations specifically; it would be good if you could work on
>> that.
> 
> That was the beginning of your reply.  There was no previous context to
> quote.

It was the text that *followed*, and that you snipped, that put the part of 
my statement that you quoted, in context. 

>>> The rest of your trash
>>
>> Not everything that you choose to ignore or fail to understand is “trash”
>> because of that.
> 
> No, but almost *everything* you say is pure tripe.  You can't blame this
> on the "context".

You proceed from the false assumption that if someone is wrong on one thing 
(and to date we have only *your* *opinion* on that) must be wrong on 
another.
 
>>> was based on this incorrect premise; it would be a waste of bandwidth to
>>> repost your entire tripe.
>> As showed by the PHP output that I posted further below, and that you
>> snipped, the premise is _not_ incorrect.  To elaborate:
> 
> The premise is completely incorrect.  'x11.11c' is NEVER considered a
> numeric value, as several other people (including me) have shown.  And
> the '.' is NEVER an operator when within a quoted string.

Apparently you do not understand that is_numeric() treats both numeric 
literals and numeric representations in string literals the same.  Therefore 
it matters to the return value of is_numeric() if string content could be a 
numeric literal when used verbatim in PHP code.  I have showed that and why 
it could not be a numeric literal, providing the rationale for the return 
value of is_numeric().
 
>> As a result, “x11“ would be considered a constant's identifier; because
>> such a constant would likele be undeclared, it would be parsed as if it
>> was a string value containing the characters of the would-be identifier
>> as characters (see the PHP Notices in the test, and the generated output
>> for proof of that).
> 
> Nope, not unless there was a define ('x11',...) statement previous to
> this.  It is a string - plain and simple.  […]

The PHP output that I posted shows that a standalone identifier – such *as 
if* that string *content* was used in PHP code is met with a PHP Notice and 
is *treated as* I described above from then on.  The Notice is issued then 
because the source code is ambiguous, therefore error-prone.  As you 
confirmed, if a constant having that sequence of identifiers would be 
declared, the source code would change meaning.

This is important because if a sequence of characters is potentially a 
constant identifier, it cannot be a numeric literal at the same time.

>> “11c” would be considered a constant identifier as well (and treated the
>> same way) if it did not start with a decimal digit.  Or it would be
>> considered a decimal literal if it did not contain/end with “c” (allowed
>> would only be “e” followed by a decimal literal, for the
>> exponential/scientific decimal format).  But as it does contain/end with
>> “c”
>> that is not in a hexadecimal literal, it is a *syntax error*.  Therefore,
>> the entire expression would not compile and the entire PHP program would
>> not compile, being syntactically in error.
> 
> Wrong again.  In PHP you have to have a define() statement to create a
> constant.  It is part of string.  […]

I am aware that one needs define() for constants.  This has nothing to do 
with the fact that an identifier is treated as a string value containing the 
identifiers characters if there is no constant declared with that 
identifier.  And it has nothing to do with the fact that a constant cannot 
start with a decimal digit, or that a decimal literal cannot contain the 
character “c”.  That therefore such a PHP program would be syntactical in 
error; that therefore, too, “x11.11c” cannot be a numeric literal, and that 
therefore, too, is_numeric('x11.11c') MUST return FALSE (which, contrary to 
the OP's claims, it does).

>> We have now ascertaine that, as Thomas Mlynarczyk stated, “x11.11c”
>> cannot be a proper numeric literal in PHP (it would be an operation
>> expression
>> [that would not compile, but that is unimportant from here]).  As that is
>> the case, “'x11.11c'” also is not considered numeric in PHP, which is why
> 
> No, it is a string value, nothing more, nothing less.

It is a string value whose suitability to serve as a numeric value is being 
tested with is_numeric().  Therefore it matters what the PHP grammar has to 
say about numeric values.
 
>>    is_numeric('x11.11c')
>>
>> must return FALSE.  By contrast, is_numeric('0x11') returns TRUE.
> 
> is_numeric('0x11') has nothing to do with the problem at hand.

Yes, it has.  Both the added “0” prefix and the omitted “.11c” suffix make 
“0x11” a proper numeric (hexadecimal integer) representation as per the PHP 
grammar.  Which is what is_numeric() is supposed to test.
 
>> However, there appears to be an *actual* mismatch between PHP manual and
>> implementation in said PHP version as
>>
>>    is_numeric('0b11001001')
>>
>> returns FALSE when according to the manual it should return TRUE (binary
>> integer literals are available since PHP 5.4.0 per the manual, and they
>> do compile and properly evaluate in tests there.
> 
> Again, absolutely nothing to do with this problem.

Yes, it has.  The OP claimed there was a bug in is_numeric().  If we assume 
the manual to be correct, this example shows that there actually *would be* 
a bug in is_numeric() in PHP 5.4.4(-15) and 5.4.15(-1 on Debian GNU/Linux).  
But it would be *another* bug.

That might be immaterial to you, but I consider it important for my fellow 
PHP developers to learn of it.


PointedEars
-- 
    realism:    HTML 4.01 Strict
    evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
    madness:    XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
                                                    -- Bjoern Hoehrmann

Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-12 15:22 +0100
  Re: bug in  is_numeric Salvatore <sal@yojimbo.hack.invalid> - 2013-05-12 15:31 +0000
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 17:55 +0200
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 17:58 +0200
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2013-05-12 18:06 +0200
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-12 16:24 +0000
    Re: bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-12 18:41 +0100
      Re: bug in  is_numeric Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2013-05-13 13:50 +0200
        Re: bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-13 14:58 +0100
          Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-13 10:11 -0400
            Re: bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-13 15:15 +0100
              Re: bug in  is_numeric Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2013-05-13 17:29 +0200
              Re: bug in  is_numeric "J.O. Aho" <user@example.net> - 2013-05-13 19:55 +0200
              Re: bug in  is_numeric Richard Yates <richard@yatesguitar.com> - 2013-05-14 06:41 -0700
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-14 21:43 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-14 23:01 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-15 05:48 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-15 06:11 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:36 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-15 15:19 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-15 20:23 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-15 20:49 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-15 21:58 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-15 22:20 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-15 22:42 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2013-05-15 23:53 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-16 00:29 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-16 00:40 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-16 05:00 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:16 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 00:45 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 22:52 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 18:33 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-17 20:39 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 23:45 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-18 14:47 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-15 20:57 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-16 00:09 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-17 01:17 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-16 20:30 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Christoph Becker <cmbecker69@gmx.de> - 2013-05-18 14:51 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 10:07 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 11:56 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 14:32 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 22:24 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 17:01 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-18 21:58 +0000
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 19:21 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-19 02:22 +0000
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 22:41 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:28 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:42 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:42 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:39 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 01:01 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 05:59 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-19 07:49 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:31 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-19 12:39 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:43 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:52 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:42 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 01:03 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 06:00 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:45 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:27 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:45 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:37 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:43 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 00:59 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 06:02 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 17:08 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-18 23:58 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 19:22 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 17:11 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 19:23 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:35 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 09:46 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:23 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-19 14:44 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-21 00:54 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-21 06:03 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-23 15:38 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-01 17:36 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-01 14:54 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-05 15:25 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-05 10:34 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-05 17:02 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-05 12:30 -0400
                OT: What you say is not always what you mean (was: Re: bug in  is_numeric) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-06-05 20:20 +0200
                Re: OT: What you say is not always what you mean Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-06-05 14:40 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 21:51 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-18 17:13 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-19 00:49 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 05:24 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-19 12:40 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-19 12:43 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-19 11:29 -0500
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-18 14:53 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:41 -0400
          Re: bug in  is_numeric Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-05-13 08:35 -0700
          Re: bug in  is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 20:26 +0000
      Re: bug in  is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-13 20:15 +0000
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Robert Heller <heller@deepsoft.com> - 2013-05-12 13:03 -0500
  Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 18:03 +0200
    Re: bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-12 18:34 +0100
      Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 19:40 +0200
        Re: bug in  is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 21:51 +0200
  Re: bug in  is_numeric "Sanders Kaufman" <bucky@kaufman.net> - 2013-05-12 11:47 -0500
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-12 18:56 +0200
    Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas Mlynarczyk <thomas@mlynarczyk-webdesign.de> - 2013-05-12 19:05 +0200
      Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 19:38 +0200
        Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 19:46 +0200
        Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-12 14:11 -0400
          Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-12 20:39 +0200
            Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-12 16:51 -0400
              Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 01:27 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-12 20:35 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 11:07 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-13 09:02 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 16:57 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 17:10 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-13 13:52 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-13 20:28 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 18:28 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-17 00:33 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric SwissCheese <swisscheese@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-16 22:34 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 10:28 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Norman Peelman <npeelman@cfl.rr.com> - 2013-05-18 08:00 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-18 14:18 +0200
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-05-18 13:20 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 08:47 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-18 14:05 +0100
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-18 10:16 -0400
                Re: bug in  is_numeric Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 16:14 +0200
  Re: bug in  is_numeric Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-05-14 10:34 +0200
    Re: bug in  is_numeric fred <email@address.com> - 2013-05-14 14:47 +0100
      Re: bug in  is_numeric Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-05-14 14:54 +0000
      Re: bug in  is_numeric Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-05-15 08:05 +0200
        Re: bug in  is_numeric Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-05-15 06:27 -0400
          Re: bug in  is_numeric Erwin Moller <erwinmollerusenet@xs4all.nl> - 2013-05-15 13:11 +0200

csiph-web