New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Corrections to format precision description. #31291
Conversation
* `precision` field is an integer, not decimal
* clarify that stated limitations are on presentation type
rather than input value type. Especially misleading is
"precision is not allowed for integer values", since integer
value input to a format like `.1f` is fine.
* regarding max field size, replace "non-number" with "string",
which is the only non-numeric presentation type
|
@ericvsmith would you mind reviewing this doc correction? |
The change looks really good. Thanks. @mdickinson, any comments?
As long as we're changing this section, should 'e' and 'E' be mentioned?
|
Changes look good to me. How about "decimal integer" in place of "integer"? (Strictly speaking, the precision isn't an integer - it's a decimal string representation of an integer.) FWIW, "decimal integer" is the language that the C specification uses here. From C99:
|
Probably, yes, though it would be fine to change it in a follow-up PR. Technically, the same description as for |
I'm okay with it being a separate PR. So other than "decimal integer", this is ready to go. Note that for width it already says: "width is a decimal integer". |
|
Thanks @belm0 for the PR |
* `precision` field is a decimal integer
* clarify that stated limitations are on presentation type
rather than input value type. Especially misleading is
"precision is not allowed for integer values", since integer
value input to a format like `.1f` is fine.
* regarding max field size, replace "non-number" with "string",
which is the only non-numeric presentation type
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:ericvsmith
(cherry picked from commit 1d6ce67)
Co-authored-by: John Belmonte <john@neggie.net>
|
Sorry, @belm0, I could not cleanly backport this to |
|
GH-31320 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.10 branch. |
|
GH-31321 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.9 branch. |
* `precision` field is a decimal integer
* clarify that stated limitations are on presentation type
rather than input value type. Especially misleading is
"precision is not allowed for integer values", since integer
value input to a format like `.1f` is fine.
* regarding max field size, replace "non-number" with "string",
which is the only non-numeric presentation type
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:ericvsmith.
(cherry picked from commit 1d6ce67)
Co-authored-by: John Belmonte <john@neggie.net>
* `precision` field is a decimal integer
* clarify that stated limitations are on presentation type
rather than input value type. Especially misleading is
"precision is not allowed for integer values", since integer
value input to a format like `.1f` is fine.
* regarding max field size, replace "non-number" with "string",
which is the only non-numeric presentation type
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:ericvsmith
(cherry picked from commit 1d6ce67)
Co-authored-by: John Belmonte <john@neggie.net>
* `precision` field is a decimal integer
* clarify that stated limitations are on presentation type
rather than input value type. Especially misleading is
"precision is not allowed for integer values", since integer
value input to a format like `.1f` is fine.
* regarding max field size, replace "non-number" with "string",
which is the only non-numeric presentation type
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:ericvsmith.
(cherry picked from commit 1d6ce67)
Co-authored-by: John Belmonte <john@neggie.net>
precisionfield is a decimal integerrather than input value type. Especially misleading is
"precision is not allowed for integer values", since integer
value input to a format like
.1fis fine.which is the only non-numeric presentation type
Automerge-Triggered-By: GH:ericvsmith
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: