[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately
From: |
Clément Pit--Claudel |
Subject: |
bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Jan 2017 15:06:22 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 |
On 2017-01-28 14:31, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Cc: 25557@debbugs.gnu.org
>> From: Clément Pit--Claudel <clement.pitclaudel@live.com>
>> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 14:14:03 -0500
>>
>>>> I'm trying to get the shortest representation of a decimal number, rounded
>>>> to .01, not using scientific/exponential notation. I'm using values
>>>> computed in ELisp to produce CSS style sheets, which until recently didn't
>>>> allow for exponential notation. I'd like these stylesheets to be
>>>> readable, so 100% is better 100.00%, and 3.35em is better than 3.35004em.
>>>> If my code is fed a value of 5000px, I don't want it converted to 5e+3px,
>>>> because many browsers don't know how to parse that.
>>>
>>> Then I think you want to use %d for integral values and %.2f for the
>>> rest.
>>
>> No, that still won't do: it wouldn't format 3.0 as "3", if I understand
>> correctly.
>
> ??? (format "%d" 3.0) => "3"
>
> Or maybe you didn't think 3.0 was an "integral value" by my
> definition? I meant by that any value VAL which yields zero when
> passed through (mod VAL 1.0).
Yup, I misunderstood your definition of integral value. But that still doesn't
cover formatting e.g. 3.3 as "3.3" instead of "3.30", right?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/27
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately,
Clément Pit--Claudel <=
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28