[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject)
From: |
Jim Segrave |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject) |
Date: |
Thu, 17 Jul 2003 13:11:06 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.2.5.1i |
On Wed 16 Jul 2003 (20:59 +0000), Joern Thyssen wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 10:24:35PM +0200, Jim Segrave wrote
> > On Wed 16 Jul 2003 (16:54 +0000), Joern Thyssen wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 12:40:33PM -0400, address@hidden wrote
> > > > Yes if it's not too much work, I think allowing the user to select the
> > > > accuarcy would cater for all levels or users.
> > >
> > > It's now implemented as an option: "set output digits n", where n=3 is
> > > the default.
> > >
> > > Note that the rollout dialog will only show n digits from now on to
> > > ensure overall consistency (why show 4 digits in dialog but only 3 when
> > > exported to text/html).
> > >
> > > I hope this is to everyones satisfaction.
> >
> > Suggestion: Add a separate hidden option 'set output rollout
> > extradigits n' Adds (default 1) extra digits to the %f formats for
> > rollouts. With a default of 1 and a default 'set output digits 3' ,
> > you get 3 decimal results and 4 decimal rollouts. A default of 0 makes
> > them both 3.
>
> The only problem is that there are 100 calls to the relevant output
> routines, so it's a bit tedious to add a new parameter to all.
>
> If the current solution is acceptable, let's just stick with that :-)
If people really want it, there's another way :-)
replace all the calls to printf/sprintf which output equities/mwc,
etc. with calls to a wrapper function say equity_printf() and
equity_sprintf().
Introduce new format string escapes
%E and %R for evaluation and rollout floating point printouts.
The wrapper function builds a new format string, copying the input one
and substituting the %E and %R with the user chosen formats, then
calls the original function.
I am not planning to implement this.
--
Jim Segrave address@hidden
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), (continued)
RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), olivier croisille, 2003/07/16
RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), Ian Shaw, 2003/07/16
RE: [Bug-gnubg] (no subject), olivier croisille, 2003/07/17