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

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

[Vincent Lefevre]

When a precision is given, the 0 flag is ignored only for integer
conversions, not for all numeric conversions.

Signed-off-by: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>
---
 man3/printf.3 | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/man3/printf.3 b/man3/printf.3
index 790ebf4d8..b90a71293 100644
--- a/man3/printf.3
+++ b/man3/printf.3
@@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ and
 flags both appear, the
 .B \&0
 flag is ignored.
-If a precision is given with a numeric conversion
+If a precision is given with an integer conversion
 .RB ( d ,
 .BR i ,
 .BR o ,
-- 
2.40.0

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

[Alejandro Colomar]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 934 bytes --]

Hi Vincent,

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?

Thanks,

Alex

> 
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Lefevre <vincent@vinc17.net>
> ---
>  man3/printf.3 | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/man3/printf.3 b/man3/printf.3
> index 790ebf4d8..b90a71293 100644
> --- a/man3/printf.3
> +++ b/man3/printf.3
> @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ and
>  flags both appear, the
>  .B \&0
>  flag is ignored.
> -If a precision is given with a numeric conversion
> +If a precision is given with an integer conversion
>  .RB ( d ,
>  .BR i ,
>  .BR o ,

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

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

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

[Vincent Lefevre]

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?

-- 
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)

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

[Alejandro Colomar]

[-- 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 --]