Re: %a format in tests-ulc*.c

[Paul Eggert]

Bruno Haible wrote:
> The algorithm for the second case also applies to the first case, but
> no engineer with a sane mind would apply this algorithm to the first case.

Ah, that explains it! I was crazy, because I indeed thought of just that one 
interpretation, and applied it to both cases.

Perhaps this is because I am a fan of shorter, more-intuitive numbers. You can 
blame me for the fact that in Emacs the double-precision floating-point number 
closest to 0.1 displays as "0.1" rather than as the more-precise but uglier 
"0.10000000000000001".