Re: [PATCH] printf.3: Fix wording for the 0 flag with given precision

[Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1293 bytes --]

Hi,

On 4/1/23 03:46, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2023-03-31 21:35:19 +0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>> On 3/31/23 16:33, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
>>> When a precision is given, the 0 flag is ignored only for integer
>>> conversions, not for all numeric conversions.
>>
>> I think I've seen some related discussion in some other list,
>> right?  Could you please link to it in the commit message?
> 
> If you mean my message "printf: 0 flag and given precision for %b" in
> the libc-alpha list, then this does not concern the printf man page
> yet, because this man page currently does not mention %b at all (%b
> is rather new, and not in the current C standard). This should be
> added to the man page, but this is not trivial, and I think that the
> inconsistency I've mentioned should be resolve in one way or the
> other before %b is added to the man page (in order to make sure that
> it does not contain something that could become obsolete).
> 
> So, does one really need the link in the commit message, while %b is
> not in the man page yet?

Nah, I thought it might have something to do with it.

I applied the patch.  Thanks,

Alex

> 

-- 
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]