Talk:Roman numerals/Decode: Difference between revisions
(added query about Roman fractions, also added a thanks. -- ~~~~) |
m (→Roman numeral, returning an integer: eliminated the double negatives in a sentence, don't ya know? -- ~~~~) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
==Roman numeral, returning an integer== |
==Roman numeral, returning an integer== |
||
This task askes to take a Roman numeral (as its argument) and return a numeric decimal integer. This assumes that the Roman numeral is an integer. What if the Roman numeral contains (or is) a fraction? I presume then, |
This task askes to take a Roman numeral (as its argument) and return a numeric decimal integer. This assumes that the Roman numeral is an integer. What if the Roman numeral contains (or is) a fraction? I presume then, that Roman numerals to be checked won't have fractions. The Romans had a base 12 fractional system. One-twelfth (fraction) is an ounce which we still use in pounds and ounces, where the troy pound contains 12 ounces. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 07:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 19:34, 18 July 2012
Hello
My code http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Roman_numerals/Encode#Prolog works in both ways Roman => Arabic and Arabic => Roman. It can be published in this page. user:Trap D 13/05/2011 18:25
Roman numeral numbers
I feel that any legal Roman numeral number (such as IIII should be converted correctely and without error. The Romans started using IV (and others) after they realized the praticableness of shortening their numbers, especially those having 8s in them; easily justified when chiseling those numbers in stone or scribing them in wet clay.
Also, numbers such as IIXX should also be converted correctly, as they do appear on old structures and tombstones. Even though modern rules say such a construct is invalid, the number still has an equivalent decimal number. -- Gerard Schildberger 03:53, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Furthermore, the Latin word for eighteen is duodeviginti which literally means two-from-twenty, or IIXX. -- Gerard Schildberger 21:34, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
asking for help
Does anyone know how to fix a problem I'm having with the overbar template which, for some reason, decides to italicize the text after the overbarred characters "for twenty-thousand"?
The offending code is in the REXX program, version 4. People should never give a loaded gun to kids. Pardon me if this isn't the right place to ask this type of question. I couldn't find any other usage of overbars in Rossetta Code.
I can "fix" the overbar/italicizing problem by putting the "for twenty-thousand" on a new line (via the html "br").
Also, I would like to express how to display an HTML tag without HTML "using" it (as in the previous line). I assume that there's some type of escape character(s). -- Gerard Schildberger 03:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
It was a stray newline in the Template:Overline which I just now fixed. If you want to talk about HTML then you can escape it in the usual fashion, &br>, or you can use <nowiki><br></nowiki>. HTML inside of <lang> blocks is also not interpreted. —Kevin Reid 19:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fix and the hints (albeit a wee bit late for the gratitude). -- Gerard Schildberger 07:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Roman numeral, returning an integer
This task askes to take a Roman numeral (as its argument) and return a numeric decimal integer. This assumes that the Roman numeral is an integer. What if the Roman numeral contains (or is) a fraction? I presume then, that Roman numerals to be checked won't have fractions. The Romans had a base 12 fractional system. One-twelfth (fraction) is an ounce which we still use in pounds and ounces, where the troy pound contains 12 ounces. -- Gerard Schildberger 07:23, 11 July 2012 (UTC)