From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Schwab Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: doc string of `format' - FLAGS unexplained Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:07:23 +0100 Message-ID: References: <003c01c8767e$115f1520$0600a8c0@us.oracle.com> <87r6f0wrxe.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87k5ksk1kb.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1204027674 18670 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2008 12:07:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 26 13:08:19 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JTybN-0005HD-GY for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:08:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JTyar-0002P6-IF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:07:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JTyan-0002O9-5d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:07:29 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JTyal-0002ME-Kp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:07:28 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JTyal-0002M5-GA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:07:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JTyal-000889-GE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 07:07:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Relay2.suse.de (mail2.suse.de [195.135.221.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFEF4389A0; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:07:23 +0100 (CET) X-Yow: Yow!! That's a GOOD IDEA!! Eating a whole FIELD of COUGH MEDICINE should make you feel MUCH BETTER!! In-Reply-To: <87k5ksk1kb.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Mon\, 25 Feb 2008 19\:23\:48 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.4-2.6 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:90501 Archived-At: Chong Yidong writes: > Andreas Schwab writes: > >> Chong Yidong writes: >> >>> In particular, the statement "flags is [-+ #0]+" is misleading; it >>> should be [+ #]+, since the - and 0 characters are actually used to >>> identify the width specifier instead. >> >> This is wrong. '-' and '0' are real flags that can be freely mixed wi= th >> other flags, eg. "%0#10d" is valid and the same as "%#010d". They are >> never considered part of the width. > > The question is, do we regard this as an undocumented side-effect of > the implementation? It works the same as in C, which is widely understood. Gratuitous differences only confuse people. Andreas. --=20 Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstra=DFe 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany PGP key fingerprint =3D 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED= 5 "And now for something completely different."