Re: [Success/exposed test failures] XEmacs 21.4.14 "Reasonable Discussion" i586-pc-win32

Glynn> Given that we don't appear to be under any obligation to Glynn> mimic the ANSI C semantics, I can't see any harm in Glynn> defining the semantics of the %e specifier in such a way Glynn> that it can be implemented using MSVC's sprintf(). Stephen> You don't? That would make the results of an elisp Stephen> program needlessly platform-dependent. Stephen> ＠defun format string &rest objects Stephen> ... The %e specifier takes a floating point value, and Stephen> formats it in scientific notation. For portable use of Stephen> this specifier, you must test for platform; for exponents Stephen> in the range -99 to +99 this field will be 1 column wider Stephen> if XEmacs was compiled with MSVC. ... Stephen> That just ain't right. It's hard enough to format nice Stephen> tables as it is. Well, yes, but even http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/printf.html doesn't specify this requirement clearly. A draft of C9X, OTOH, which I was able to find, states: the exponent. The exponent always contains at least two digits, and only as many more digits as necessary to represent the exponent. If the value What online resources should we be reading for stuff like this? -- Adrian Aichner mailto:adrian＠xemacs.org http://www.xemacs.org/