Talk:Roman numerals/Encode

The Java example does not enforce the requirement that the parameter for the conversion function must be a positive integer. Enforcement of such a requirement should result in an error condition, such as an exception, rather than simply no output when a value less than 1 is passed to the function.--Waldorf 21:14, 31 March 2008 (MDT)

Fixed. --Mwn3d 21:22, 31 March 2008 (MDT)

No, the requirement said to take a positive integer ..., it did NOT say that it HAD to be a positive integer. My REXX version also allows a non-positive number. I (and I assume others) have removed the error checking (such as negative numbers), non-whole numbers, and the like). I often remove a lot of error checking from my REXX code that I post as it would just clutter up the example with many, many error checks.

400

I'm pretty sure CD is 400. If you look at wp:Roman_numerals#Modern_Roman_numerals it shows it. --Mwn3d 21:20, 31 March 2008 (MDT)

Spec?

Roman numerals are by no means standardized. You should reference the particular brand of encoding you wish to support. --IanOsgood 08:53, 1 April 2008 (MDT)

What are our choices? --Mwn3d 09:09, 1 April 2008 (MDT)

Project Euler had a similar task, where they addressed possible rules in a FAQ. Wikipedia has also a section on special rules. I guess the safe way is the way all examples so far do it. But maybe specifying it isn't important (I don't know which similarities/dissimilarities between different languages this task should highlight). --Dirkt 15:38, 1 April 2008 (MDT)

some options: Attic, old style, modern (where IV is always used instead of IIII, but almost all clock-face makers today use the old style, and also where u and j are used in addition of v and i , the use of lowercase letters, and expressing large numbers). The manner of expressing large numbers could be considered an option. The REXX program that I included uses parentheses and deep parentheses for large numbers. Also, support for "nothing", or "zero" if you wish to call it that.

Perl problem

The use of the works_with template is interacting badly with the semantic wiki markup, but I'm not sure how to unpick the mess so I'll just flag this up for now. –Donal Fellows 08:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I've been wanting to poke the SMW folks in #semantic-mediawiki for thoughts (you can see other weird issues in Special:Properties, but I haven't had time. --Michael Mol 12:15, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Parsing roman numerals

Is there a page for that? I couldn't find one...

I'm not aware of one. It seems a perfectly appropriate task idea. Why don't you create it? (I'd suggest you create an account first) --Michael Mol 20:03, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

If you do create it I would suggest putting it at Roman numberals/Decode or something like that. Also check for task creation hints at Rosetta Code:Add a Task. --Mwn3d 20:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I've done this (minus the typo): Roman numerals/Decode --Mikachu 20:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Heh...good catch. Anyway it looks good. I'll move this task to Roman numerals/Encode so it's consistent. --Mwn3d 21:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Additional Roman numerals: Ⅰ, Ⅴ, Ⅹ, Ⅼ, Ⅽ, Ⅾ, Ⅿ, ⅰ, ⅴ, ⅹ, ⅼ, ⅽ, ⅾ, ⅿ, ↀ, ↁ, ↂ, Ↄ

It might be worth permitting full range of Roman numerals eg:

• Ⅰ, Ⅴ, Ⅹ, Ⅼ, Ⅽ, Ⅾ, Ⅿ, ⅰ, ⅴ, ⅹ, ⅼ, ⅽ, ⅾ, ⅿ, ↀ, ↁ, ↂ, Ↄ

c.f. wiktionary

NevilleDNZ 23:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Is it just me or can anyone else see those characters? All I see (under Microsoft Internet Explorer and FireFox Aurora) are "empty squares". Gerard Schildberger

I see the characters in FF 12. --Mwn3d 02:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

It depends on the fonts you've got installed; if they don't have the character glyph, you get that box (on Windows; different platforms have different substitutions). Not much we can do about that. –Donal Fellows 10:46, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I think they're permitted. Worth it? I dunno. Judging by the "modern Roman numerals" stuff I don't think people really sue them anymore. If you want to then go for it. --Mwn3d 02:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)