[Nickle] Bugs with new output formatting
keithp at keithp.com
Wed Oct 17 22:41:44 PDT 2007
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 16:15 -0700, Barton C Massey wrote:
> Unfortunately, the new output formatting seems to have some
> > 1/(2**64-1)
Do you have something in your .nicklerc file? This works for me
> > 1/3
As does this.
> In general it appears that the curly braces are simply
> omitted, without expanding the value in any reasonable way.
> This seems to be the case even if "infinite precision" is
> specified---I can't find any way to get the curly braces
format="%G" does this trick.
> It's never been obvious to me why the first format command
> is acceptable, but the second is not :-).
Yeah, we need some consistent documented behaviour for the various
> I'm not sure what to do about all this. I think the user
> should be able to select between a "%f"-like or "%g"-like
> output format and the old format with the curly braces for
> repeats using the format variable. I also think that Nickle
> should accept curly-repeats on the input, although I know
> that's a pain in the neck.
Uh, this works for both the lexer and scanf...
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : /pipermail/nickle/attachments/20071017/c9dbc39d/attachment.pgp
More information about the Nickle