Sorting of dependant fields is wrong

[Robby Stephenson]

Hi Jens,

On Sunday 25 February 2007, Jens Seidel wrote:
> I have a dependant field which description consists of
> %{field1}%{field2}. field1 is a number field and field2 is a text field.
>
> If I group entries according to this field I get the bogus order:
> "17A" (should be 17a as I reported already)

I think I just fixed the capitalization problem, so if you want to test out 
1.2 branch.

> "18"
> "4"
> "5"
> instead of 4, 5, 17a, 18.

This is the "sorting as text and not number" issue again, right? The only 
thing that has occurred to me is that I could check to see if both strings 
in the comparison start with a number, even for a text field, and then if 
so, do a numeric comparison. That might be a bit intensive but would work 
how you seem to expect it to. Comments?

> Another minor issue: If I add the real number "4,5" to a text field (","
> is the locale specific decimal separator) it is rewritten to "4, 5".
> No space is added if I enter "4.5".

I think I got that fixed, too. It's a long leftover item from when I was 
using a comma as the separator value.

Thanks,
Robby