convert money values to integer?

[1/13] from: kpeters:otaksoft at: 26-Aug-2007 12:25

Wow - I expected this to work: a: $100 print to-integer a a: %=$4.95 print to-decimal a So what do you use for this simple? conversion? Thanks, Kai

[2/13] from: dhsunanda:gma:il at: 16-Aug-2007 10:07

Kai:

> a: $100 > So what do you use for this simple? conversion?

a/2 == 100.0 Sunanda

[3/13] from: christian:ensel:gmx at: 26-Aug-2007 21:42

a: $100.95 print to-integer second a print round second a etc. HTH, Christian Kai Peters schrieb:

[4/13] from: dockimbel:free at: 26-Aug-2007 21:46

As explained in http://www.rebol.com/docs/core23/rebolcore-16.html#section-3.4

>> a: $100

== $100.00

>> second a

== 100.0

>> type? second a

== decimal! I agree that 'to-integer and 'to-decimal should work on money! type. Can someone RAMBO that if it's not already there ? -- DocKimbel Kai Peters wrote:

[5/13] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 26-Aug-2007 12:00

On Sunday 26 August 2007, Kai Peters wrote:

> Wow - I expected this to work: > > a: $100

Strings are handy for that...

> print to-integer a >> to-integer next to-string a

== 100 ;; next:

> a: %=$4.95

I'm not sure of assignment above. Did you mailer add something? ;; similarly:

>> a: $4.95

== $4.95

[6/13] from: kpeters::otaksoft::com at: 26-Aug-2007 12:56

Thanks for the super-prompt help everybody! Had skimmed the Core Manual (more the examples, to be honest) and thus not read about the fact that money! is a hybrid two-part datatype - now it makes sense! Thanks again, Kai

[7/13] from: tim-johnsons::web::com at: 26-Aug-2007 14:43

On Thursday 16 August 2007, Sunanda wrote:

> Kai: > > a: $100 > > So what do you use for this simple? conversion? > > a/2

Say what? Well, I just learned something new! On a related note, look here:

>> t: now/date

== 26-Aug-2007

>> t/1

== 2007

>> t/2

== 8

>> t/3

== 26 ;; but the path referencing is counter-intuitive ;; (to me anyway) Tim

[8/13] from: kpeters:otaksoft at: 26-Aug-2007 17:51

Hmm, I did not read up on it yet but it would seem as if dates are kept in ISO format yyyy-mm-dd internally and thus we would see what you describe below?? Kai

[9/13] from: tim-johnsons::web::com at: 26-Aug-2007 19:05

On Sunday 26 August 2007, Kai Peters wrote:

> Hmm, I did not read up on it yet but it would seem as if dates are kept in > ISO format yyyy-mm-dd internally and thus we would see what you > describe below??

I think you nailed it. referencing path/indexes on 'now (without the /date refinement) appears consistant with ISO. tim

[10/13] from: gregg:pointillistic at: 26-Aug-2007 22:37

Hi Tim, TJ> Well, I just learned something new! TJ> On a related note, look here:

>>> t: now/date

TJ> == 26-Aug-2007

>>> t/1

TJ> == 2007

>>> t/2

TJ> == 8

>>> t/3

TJ> == 26 TJ> ;; but the path referencing is counter-intuitive TJ> ;; (to me anyway)

>> make date! [2007 4 16]

== 16-Apr-2007 -- Gregg

[11/13] from: compkarori:gma:il at: 27-Aug-2007 17:10

What annoys me is that you can't do now/1 .. now/2 .. now/3 etc. On 8/27/07, Gregg Irwin <gregg-pointillistic.com> wrote:

> >> make date! [2007 4 16] > == 16-Apr-2007 > > -- Gregg > > -- > To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to > lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject. >

-- Graham Chiu http://www.synapsedirect.com Synapse-EMR - innovative electronic medical records system

[12/13] from: carl:cybercraft at: 27-Aug-2007 18:37

On Monday, 27-August-2007 at 17:10:41 Graham Chiu wrote,

>What annoys me is that you can't do now/1 .. now/2 .. now/3 etc.

Try this! ... old-now: :now now: reduce [ does [first old-now] does [second old-now] does [third old-now] does [fourth old-now] does [fifth old-now] none none none 'year does [first old-now] 'month does [second old-now] 'day does [third old-now] 'time does [fourth old-now] 'zone does [fifth old-now] 'date does [old-now/date] 'weekday does [old-now/weekday] 'yearday does [old-now/yearday] 'precise does [old-now/precise] ]

>> now/1

== 2007

>> now/year

== 2007

>> now/2

== 8

>> now/month

== 8

>> now/4

== 18:30:41

>> now/4

== 18:30:43

>> now/time

== 18:30:51

>> now/date

== 27-Aug-2007

>> now/precise

== 27-Aug-2007/18:31:05.406+12:00 However, unfortunately...

>> now/time/precise

** Script Error: time has no refinement called precise ** Near: now/time/precise Close though! :-) -- Carl Read.

[13/13] from: tim-johnsons:web at: 27-Aug-2007 7:07

On Sunday 26 August 2007, Carl Read wrote: Very usable! Thanks Carl tim