[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately
From: |
Clément Pit--Claudel |
Subject: |
bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Jan 2017 10:04:33 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 |
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
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/27
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately,
Clément Pit--Claudel <=
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/01/28
- bug#25557: Documentation of format doesn't describe "g" accurately, Clément Pit--Claudel, 2017/01/28