This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug libc/2194] printf: meaning of precision for 'd', 'i', 'o', 'u', 'x', 'X' directives
- From: "schwab at suse dot de" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 23 Jan 2006 16:45:53 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libc/2194] printf: meaning of precision for 'd', 'i', 'o', 'u', 'x', 'X' directives
- References: <20060123151149.2194.bruno@clisp.org>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From schwab at suse dot de 2006-01-23 16:45 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> > Why do you think the grouping characters should be inserted after the
> > padding?
>
> The bug report is not about padding: I didn't specify a width.
The precision and the width are the same concepts, only with different effects
on the effective field width. Precision padding is still padding.
> I specified
> a precision, and the POSIX explanation of precision talks about the
> "number of digits", not about padding.
The number of digits is achieved by padding it with zero.
> > POSIX says in the description of the '0' flag:
>
> A '0' flag is not specified in the sample program above.
That is true, but the concepts are the same. The formatting in your case
should be consistent with that.
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2194
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.