Subject: Re: bug#44155: Print integers as characters

From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 00:03:31 +0100

2 nov. 2020 kl. 22.36 skrev Juri Linkov <[email-masked]>:
> 
>> Thus we would have 10 -> ?\n, 13 -> ?\r, 127 -> ?\d, 65 -> ?A,
>> 255 -> ?ÿ, but 31 -> 31, 129 -> 129, 4194303 -> 4194303.
> 
> Hopefully, printing some characters as numbers will fix
> the currently broken test.

It does! Here is a proposed patch. We could add a separate radix control later if you like.

One detail that I'm undecided about is whether to remove the more obscure control escapes \f, \a, \v, \e and \d, on the grounds that they are less likely to be used as actual characters and that users may prefer to see them as numbers instead. C, and most languages inheriting them from C, lack \e or \d; \f and \a are rare today, and \v is an anachronism.

> PS: I notices inconsistency in these names: "integer" in print-integer-radix
> is singular, but "integers" in print-integers-as-characters is plural.

Actually, 'integer' in 'integer radix' plays the part of adjective!