3 ms·
The usual way is a line. It can be faked here with code formatting (4 spaces to force mono font) and underscores: ___ 29000
by drivers99 6y ago
The usual way is a line. It can be faked here with code formatting (4 spaces to force mono font) and underscores:
___
29000
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- CydeWeys 6y agoIt bothers me that this overloads the notation for repeating fractions. I guess there wouldn't be a use case requiring both in a single number, but you can imagine multiple numbers on the same page using this formatting for different purposes and it being confusing. And it's fine for writing out by hand or in TeX (I assume), but good luck using it in any other context as we see here! Ideally a notation would be keyboard-friendly, at least for something with as wide an applicability as this anyway. But this is certainly a good starting point.
- a1369209993 6y ago> multiple numbers on the same page using this formatting for different purposes and it being confusing. I think it's unambigous at least: 2̅9̅0̅00 vs 11̅.̅4̅2̅8̅5̅7̅; sigfigs has overline at the start, while repeating has overline at the end.