I didn't notice anyone using Roman numerals. I tested the applicable subroutine with lots of values, since I wrote it for this and hadn't used it before. If there are any bugs with it other than the design decision documented, please let me know. This might actually sneak into a project since I spent a good half hour designing, coding, testing, and commenting it.
Chris
$x = 'ii';
$y = 'ii';
sub Roman {
=pod
This doesn't check for validity, as the
subtraction rule is always honored, even
for I before M if you want to do that.
Roman numerals generally allow I only before
V or X for the subtraction rule, X before
an L or a C, and C before a D or an M.
If you need to check validity, it'd be a
task suitable for a separate sub since
this one should be able to handle horked
but workable values by design, just in
case. Heck, this doesn't even check for
the existence of invalid characters. It
just ignores them.
=cut
my $z = 0;
my @foo = uc(shift) =~ /(M+|D+|C+|L+|X+|V+|I+)/g;
my %value = (
'M' => 1000,
'D' => 500,
'C' => 100,
'L' => 50,
'X' => 10,
'V' => 5,
'I' => 1,
);
for ( my $i = 0; $i < scalar @foo; $i++ ) {
my $ch = substr $foo[$i], 0, 1;
my $v = $value{$ch};
my $nxt_ch = '';
my $nxt_v = -1;
if ( defined ( $foo[$i + 1] ) ) {
$nxt_ch = substr( $foo[$i + 1], 0, 1 );
$nxt_v = $value{$nxt_ch};
}
foreach ( 1..length $foo[$i] ) {
if ( $nxt_v > $v ) {
$z -= $value{$ch};
} else {
$z += $value{$ch};
}
}
}
return $z;
}
printf "The result is: %d\n", (Roman $x) + (Roman $y);