[TRINIDAD-1678] TrNumberFormat.prototype.numberToString doesn't account for numbers represented via scientific notation

• Type: Bug
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Minor
• Resolution: Fixed
• Affects Version/s: 1.2.12-core
• Fix Version/s: 1.2.13-core
• Component/s: Components
• Assignee: Jeanne Waldman
• Reporter: Cale Scholl
• Created: 07/Jan/10 21:05
• Updated: 21/Feb/12 23:50
• Resolved: 11/Feb/10 23:09

Description

ISSUE:
----------

Say we have a 22-digit number string "7777777777777777777777". When this is converted to object it becomes 7.777777777777777e+21. This confuses TrNumberFormat.prototype.numberToString, as the poor guy thinks he's dealing with a fractional number, when really it's a big ass integer.

FIX:

---

The solution is, when converting from object to string, we first convert the string from scientific notation to standard expanded notation before applying any other formatting. See TrNumberFormat.scientificToExpanded.

Note that I also added a utility method TrNumberFormat.trimLeadingZeroes. This is preferable to the previous hack – parseInt(parseFloat(numberString)) – because parseInt fails to correctly parse numbers represented via scientific notation (e.g. 7.777e+21 becomes 7).

TESTS:
----------

Tested using the following:

<af:inputText label="default" id="it1">
<af:convertNumber maxFractionDigits="40"/>
</af:inputText>

Results:

(1) "7777777777777777777777" -> 7.777777777777777e+21 -> "7,777,777,777,777,777,000,000"
(2) "0.00000000000000000000123456" -> 1.23456e-21 -> "0.00000000000000000000123456"
(3) "1234.567890123456789012" -> 1234.567890123457 -> "1,234.567890123457"

When would this fix possibly be useful? See case (2) above. That's the only case where scientific notation is used AND we don't lose any precision.