On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 01:00:30PM +0100, Thomas Huriaux wrote: > Matt Kraai <kraai@ftbfs.org> (21/11/2005): > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 04:08:03PM +0100, Thomas Huriaux wrote: > > > In a few months, the DSAs will have four digits. With the current > > > sorting method (lexically), we will have the following sorting scheme: > > > dsa-1000 dsa-1001 dsa-998 dsa-999 > > > Can somebody confirm that there is no problem if I apply the attached > > > patch? (it sorts numerically instead of lexically). > > > > In my quick testing, > > > > "dsa-1001" <=> "dsa-999" > > > > returns 0, not 1. Doesn't this cause your patch to break? > > Indeed, it does not give at all the expected results (I don't know > exactly why I got what I wanted the first time I tried). > Please have a look at the attached patch, it seems to work better but > it is a little bit hackish. It's OK with me if it works, though I'd guess one of the Perl experts could come up with a more elegant solution. -- Matt
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature