[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Ken Hornstein
Subject: Re: FT_LITF?
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2021 21:43:32 -0500

>That's in the code that implements support for FT_LITF.  My question
>is:  can any of the FT_LITF code be reached?  I don't see anything in
>fmt_compile.c that creates an FT_LITF component.

That ... is my reading of things as well.

I thought maybe there was some weird thing where it would increment
the instruction if it saw a width, but no.

>Also, I don't know how an FT_LITF would be specified in an MH format
>string.  If that's correct, I don't think it's necessary to add that,
>because a literal itself could right-justified and filled as desired.

I DID think maybe you could do:

        %3(lit fart)' 

But that gets compiled to:

%3(lit fart)
        LS_LIT str "fart"
        STRF, width 3, fill ' '

Which, admittedly, accomplishes the same thing.

I am wondering if maybe back in the Dawn of Time people had implemented
COMPF, NUMF, STRF, and thought LITF made sense.  I mean, I suppose in
THEORY it does, but nothing actually generates that instruction, like
you said.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]