3 ms·
If you're lexicographically sorting, maybe? But if you're doing that, 3.10 and 3.2 won't sort correctly, either.
by deathanatos 6y ago
If you're lexicographically sorting, maybe? But if you're doing that, 3.10 and 3.2 won't sort correctly, either.
- Lammy 6y agoYou can write a locale for LC_COLLATE to make pretty much anything sort any way you'd like :) http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr10/ http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr10/
- itp 6y agoNah, this was never really about lexicographic sorting. Pre-semver, there was general consensus between systems like dpkg and RPM about how version numbers worked. This is a bit of a simplification, but it roughly works out like this: * Split version number into version numbers separated by non-alphanumeric components (e.g., 3.10.2 becomes (3,10,2) and 3.2 becomes (3,2)). * Compare two versions item by item numerically (in this case, 3==3 but 10 > 2 so 3.10.2 is newer than 3.2). This is a massive oversimplification, and if you're curious you can read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Archive:Tools/RPM/VersionComparison https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Archive:Tools/RPM/VersionComp... for the gory details. Source: long ago I worked at a company named Ximian that shipped a software update product that worked on systems using both RPM and dpkg, and I had to deeply understand this problem space.
- jdub 6y agoHa ha. waves
- evancordell 6y agoI suspect they're referring to the semver sorting rules as written in the spec: > When major, minor, and patch are equal, a pre-release version has lower precedence than a normal version: > Example: 1.0.0-alpha < 1.0.0. see: https://semver.org/#spec-item-11 https://semver.org/#spec-item-11