[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: i18n/l10n summary

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: i18n/l10n summary
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2017 16:20:55 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.0

On 06/01/2017 01:17 AM, Philipp Stephani wrote:

- Probably there's a bug lurking because the info[n] ought to be indexed by specification index, not argument index. Something like (format "%1$c %1$d" ?a) will probably do the wrong thing (untested).

Sorry, I'm not following. That call returns "a 97"; isn't that the expected result?

- We should ban mixing explicit and implicit field numbers, like POSIX printf(3) does. The gain from allowing to mix is negligible, and it makes the implementation and the documentation needlessly complex.

Sounds good, and I installed the attached.

The 1st patch fixes a performance regression introduced by calling strtoumax. I went whole-hog and removed all calls to strtoumax, since they're all performance-significant, plus it makes for one less porting issue to worry about.

The 2nd patch fixes the documentation along the lines that you suggested. And on further thought, the tradition for Emacs is to document supported behavior and not worry about slowing Emacs down to check for undocumented usage (aside from preventing crashes), so with that in mind the 2nd patch removes the check for %0$ (which never crashes).

Attachment: 0001-Improve-performance-by-avoiding-strtoumax.patch
Description: Text Data

Attachment: 0002-Limit-format-fields-to-more-POSIX-like-spec.patch
Description: Text Data

reply via email to

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