User talk:Arseniiv/Factorization

numbers as names

I'd try pseudo-positionals in this case. I already found out that you can write {{some template|1=value containing the '=' character}} if you have positional parameters with alternative names. This should also work if we ignore 1, 4, 6, 8, 9 and so on. What do you think? --Xenwolf (talk) 20:52, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

O, sorry, I see: not possible because of the 16-parameter limit. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:54, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Maybe prefixes instead? We could use the regex extension, see Template:EDOs for an example. --Xenwolf (talk) 20:55, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Please have a look on SandBox#Testing factor notation, only unsolved problem here is the trailing dot. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:21, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Looks good! Though maybe also alternatively use ^ for powers? --Arseniiv (talk) 21:28, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I read it only now (same idea nearly at the same time🙂). I think ^ looks better, it's now also possible to stuff space around the operators. --Xenwolf (talk) 21:37, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Missed your developments while extending my version. This code is way simpler but it needs obligatory *s… or that can be changed? How do you think about if * are needed?

It seems I should have written another reply here and not in User talk:Arseniiv#Infobox helper, ow. Reposting it here now:

❝ When you’re back, please look at the current version. I think it works as expected. It also does understand ^ for **, doesn’t shy from excess spaces, and makes minuses into unicode minus − which is a bit higher and wider than - and matches + and tall characters like digits: −+- −3 -3. But the code is almost unreadable and I needed to use #regex twice, otherwise the dots in the middle were deleted together with the trailing one. ❞ --Arseniiv (talk) 23:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)