Bob, at 08:16 on Fri, Dec 16 1994, you wrote to Bill Grimsley ...

BG> What about 3:640/6666 or 3:640/305.6666 ? As these contain
BG> numerals which are greater than 999, would it then fail ? 

BL> It would fail on 3:640/6666 but 3:640/305.6666 would just 
BL> ignore the point and return 3:640/305 as the address because 
BL> it already has three numbers.

Whereas proper software accepts anything at all.  BTW, there are quite a
few points with 4 numerals in their address (apart from Alex and Rachel,
/nnn.1701 comes immediately to mind).

BL> and to make sure I've got a real address I set a limit of 999. I 
BL> could make it 9999 just as easily, because I still need 3 numbers 
BL> and less than 4.  

Unless it's purely for personal consumption, I'd be inclined to change that
to allow 4 numbers then.

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 2.3á