Justin Collins wrote:
> Joel VanderWerf wrote:
>> Bill Kelly wrote:
>>>
>>> From: "Rick DeNatale" <rick.denatale / gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> As I remember it, Matz didn't want to have a version number like 1.8.10
>>>
>>> For what it's worth, my recollection is that matz wasn't
>>> _conceptually_ opposed to it, but rather it was not considered
>>> acceptable to break the existing code in the field which performed
>>> version checks based on string compares:
>>>
>>>>> "1.8.9" > "1.8.8"
>>> => true
>>>
>>>>> "1.8.10" > "1.8.9"
>>> => false
>>
>> I remember that... did anyone ever suggest other number bases?
>>
>> irb(main):001:0> "1.8.9" > "1.8.8"
>> => true
>> irb(main):002:0> "1.8.A" > "1.8.8"
>> => true
>>
>> Nah, too weird!
>>
> 
> I was looking at Erlang the other day.
> On the front page of erlang.org:
> 
> "Erlang/OTP R12B-5 released*"*

Someday, they'll get up to 27B-6.... (sorry, way too off-topic now).

-- 
       vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407