GNU bug report logs - #25557
Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Clément Pit--Claudel <clement.pitclaudel <at> live.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 25557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 14:14:03 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2017-01-28 11:25, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> Cc: 25557 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> From: Clément Pit--Claudel <clement.pitclaudel <at> live.com>
>> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2017 11:18:44 -0500
>>
>> I'm trying to get the shortest representation of a decimal number, rounded to .01, not using scientific/exponential notation.  I'm using values computed in ELisp to produce CSS style sheets, which until recently didn't allow for exponential notation.  I'd like these stylesheets to be readable, so 100% is better 100.00%, and 3.35em is better than 3.35004em. If my code is fed a value of 5000px, I don't want it converted to 5e+3px, because many browsers don't know how to parse that.
> 
> Then I think you want to use %d for integral values and %.2f for the
> rest.

No, that still won't do: it wouldn't format 3.0 as "3", if I understand correctly.

But I also think this is a minor matter, and there are many more pressing problems and exciting areas :)  Thanks for your help and patience, Eli!

Cheers,
Clément.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.