From: Jonathan Bryant <jtbryant@valdosta.edu>
To: "Quôc Peyrot" <chojin@lrde.epita.fr>
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] precision not working properly for strings in Printf?
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:11:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8503CBAB-EF9E-4CF0-89A8-2F6E454CF4DC@valdosta.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86507DD0-1BCB-4BF9-A058-0809022E564C@lrde.epita.fr>
On Jun 26, 2007, at 11:48 PM, Quôc Peyrot wrote:
>
> On Jun 27, 2007, at 5:38 AM, Jonathan Bryant wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 26, 2007, at 11:18 PM, Quôc Peyrot wrote:
>>
>>> It seems that the precision field doesn't work properly with the
>>> "s" type in Printf.printf:
>>
>> It does work properly. It's just not working the way you're
>> expecting it to work.
>
> I was just expecting it to work like the printf from the glibc:
>
> s If no l modifier is present: The const char *
> argument is
> expected to be a pointer to an array of character type
> (pointer
> to a string). Characters from the array are written up to
> (but
> not including) a terminating NUL character; if a
> precision is
> specified, no more than the number specified are written.
> If a
> precision is given, no null character need be present; if
> the
> precision is not specified, or is greater than the size of
> the
> array, the array must contain a terminating NUL character.
The OCaml standard library isn't glibc. The implementation of the
Printf/Scanf modules is custom, OCaml specific and tied into the
compiler, so one should not assume the behave the same way. They are
not simply wrappers. As a matter of fact, they have several other
differences from the glibc printf family of functions (look at the
conversion specifiers in the docs).
>
>>> # Printf.printf "%.2s" "qwerty";;
>>> qwerty- : unit = ()
>>>
>>> This should print "qw"
>>
>> No it shouldn't. The width/precision specifier guarantees a
>> _minimum_ length for strings, not an absolute length. From the
>> docs for Printf:
>
> As said above, this is not how printf is working in the glibc (at
> least on linux and Mac OS X). Any clue why the same convention has
> not been followed?
See above.
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Quôc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management:
> http://yquem.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/caml-list
> Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
> Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-27 4:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-27 3:18 Quôc Peyrot
2007-06-27 3:38 ` [Caml-list] " Jonathan Bryant
2007-06-27 3:48 ` Quôc Peyrot
2007-06-27 4:11 ` Jonathan Bryant [this message]
2007-06-27 8:34 ` Vincent Hanquez
2007-06-27 9:53 ` Jonathan Bryant
2007-06-27 11:08 ` Quôc Peyrot
2007-07-03 1:14 ` David Thomas
2007-06-27 10:46 ` Quôc Peyrot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8503CBAB-EF9E-4CF0-89A8-2F6E454CF4DC@valdosta.edu \
--to=jtbryant@valdosta.edu \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=chojin@lrde.epita.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).