[Laszlo-dev] Re: printf question

[P T Withington]

Wrong one.  That is for the shell function.  This http:// 
www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/printf.html is for  
the C library routine, which is also standardized by ISO.  I did not  
check to see which obscure features are not implemented in my code.   
This was meant to refer to printf so that people familiar with that  
would be happy.  So don't hold me to implementing the entire C  
standard.  I didn't implement anything that didn't make sense -- like  
all the type specification, which is unnecessary in a dynamically  
typed language.

On 24 Jan 2006, at 11:14, John Sundman wrote:

> Tucker,
>
> Here's the POSIX printf spec:
>
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/printf.html
>
> Does this describe what you implemented?  ( I know, we have a  
> subset -- but is the subset correctly described here?)
>
> If yes, I'll link to this.
>
> If not, I'll just drop it for now.
>
> jrs
>
> On Jan 24, 2006, at 10:41 AM, P T Withington wrote:
>
>> I confess I was referring to the Darwin man page when I  
>> implemented Debug.format.  Personally, I do not think it is  
>> important to go into more detail.  But surely there must be a  
>> POSIX standard that you should be referring to, if you refer to  
>> anything.  (And then I should check that what I implemented  
>> conforms to that POSIX spec.
>>
>> On 24 Jan 2006, at 09:21, John Sundman wrote:
>>
>>> The Dguide chapter on debugging merely says "The standard printf  
>>> conversions are accepted, with the exception of a, n, and p" ,  
>>> but it does not say what these standard conversions are.
>>>
>>> You can find them on the net, for example, here:
>>>
>>> http://www.cplusplus.com/ref/cstdio/printf.html
>>>
>>> Questions:
>>>
>>> a) These are all derived from C, n'est-ce pas?
>>>
>>> b) Is there a public domain description of these conversions  
>>> anywhere?   I would like to include a table in the dguide but  
>>> don't want to violate anybody's copyright -- and it certainly  
>>> would be easier to cut-n-paste a table than to make up a new one.
>>>
>>> c) If there is no public domain description, is there a preferred  
>>> place I should link to?  I just used the one above because it  
>>> came out tops from a google search.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> jrs
>>>
>>
>