GNU bug report logs -
#25557
Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
On 2017-01-28 03:37, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> …
> Fixed.
>> …
>
> I don't understand what you are trying to say (nor the significance of
> the '.' flag in the example). '#' forces %g to leave the trailing
> zeros after the decimal, so I added that -- is that what you wanted to
> say?
>
>> …
> Fixed.
>
>> Similar problems seem to exist in the actual documentation.
> If you mean the ELisp manual, I fixed that as well.
Thanks a lot! My comment about '#' was that the description of '#' suggested that it would only change things when the precision is 0 (which wasn't true).
>> On a related note, is there a way to get a shortest representation of a number? Something like %g, but without exponents.
>
> Sorry, I don't understand the question. How can you represent an
> arbitrary number without exponents at all, except by %f?
I'd like something like this (with a hypothetical %q):
(format "%.3q" 3) ⇒ "3"
(format "%.3q" 3.00) ⇒ "3"
(format "%.3q" 3.30) ⇒ "3.3"
(format "%.3q" 3.05) ⇒ "3.05"
(format "%.3q" 3.352) ⇒ "3.35"
(format "%.3q" 3100000) ⇒ "3100000"
This is in fact just the same as 'g', except for the last entry (%g produces "3.1e+06"). Is this achievable?
Thanks!
Clément.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]
This bug report was last modified 8 years and 171 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.