[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: ordered indexing for integers

I wrote:
> Also the index is wrong for huge numbers.  At some point the indexing
> should just give up and use max/min values, but I suppose at least
> cryptograpy-sized numbers should be usefully indexed.  I.e. at least
> two length bytes.

Eeh.  It makes more sense to check for ridiculous-sized numbers before
parsing them and just output a min/max value depending on sign.  (Or
right-truncate e.g. n*12 digits and add n*5 to the length.)  Anyway,
this needs the numbers to be normalized before passed to index/filter
functions.  Are they?  With different valid text representations of the
same number it gets hard to check against the cut-off size.