Proposal: 1) Number (integer or decimal) to Array 2) Array to Number (integer or decimal)

guest271314 guest271314 at
Fri Mar 8 17:23:53 UTC 2019

The code for "transforming" numeric values to array and array to numeric
value has at least one complete implementation. That is not the goal of
this proposal.

The goal of this proposal is to suggest to this body to take up the task of
defining the various manners in which that transformation can be achieved,
as illustrated at the example for the number *e* at

>From perspective here, the third example provides the output (in array
representation) which can be manipulated more extensively than the previous
two examples.

[2, .718281828459045] // example 1

[2.7, 18281828459045] // example 2

[2, 0.7, 1, 8, 2, 8, 1, 8, 2, 8, 4, 5, 9] // example 3

How should those three examples be named for disambiguation as to the

If this body does decide to take up the matter of actually defining Number
and/or Math, and Array methods to perform the conversions, it would be
helpful if each of the three (and potentially more) possible outputs have a
clearly defined name for that output.

AFAIK, there is no prior art relevant to conversion or "transforming"
JavaScript numeric values to array and array to numeric values.

Does the above make sense to you relevant to the purpose of this proposal
and what this proposal actually suggests?

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 4:45 PM Jeremy Martin <jmar777 at> wrote:

> Is it fair to suggest that transforming numeric values to and from arrays
> isn't the ultimate goal of this proposal? Based on your examples, it seems
> there are specific manipulations you would like to be able to perform to
> numeric values, and your contention is that these manipulations would be
> more straightforward if various components of that value (i.e., the
> individual digits, the decimal location, and the sign) were represented in
> a "more structured" way (i.e., an array). Is that much a fair assessment?
> If that's the case, could you expand on the specific manipulations
> themselves? Preferably something more explicit and scoped than linking out
> to one of these external references, if possible.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list