Re: doc string of `format' - FLAGS unexplained

[Chong Yidong]

Andreas Schwab <address@hidden> writes:

> Chong Yidong <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> In particular, the statement "flags is [-+ #0]+" is misleading; it
>> should be [+ #]+, since the - and 0 characters are actually used to
>> identify the width specifier instead.
>
> This is wrong.  '-' and '0' are real flags that can be freely mixed with
> other flags, eg. "%0#10d" is valid and the same as "%#010d".  They are
> never considered part of the width.

The question is, do we regard this as an undocumented side-effect of
the implementation?  Treating '-' and '0' as part of the width
specifier is conceptually simpler, and the elisp manual documents
these as such.  If we treat '0' as a real flag, then maybe the
description in the elisp manual should be revised.