1. sprintf(): different output on Windows and Linux
sprintf("%03s", {"62"})
on Windows: "062"
on Linux: " 62" (a blank space instead of zero)
Why? It's supposed to produce the same output on both, isn't it?
2. Re: sprintf(): different output on Windows and Linux
Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
> sprintf("%03s", {"62"})
>
> on Windows: "062"
> on Linux: " 62" (a blank space instead of zero)
>
> Why? It's supposed to produce the same output on both, isn't it?
The "leading zeros" feature of printf/sprintf is really meant
for numeric data, not strings, so I guess the C printf() library
routines that Euphoria depends on, are not compatible in
this unusual case.
If you do:
sprintf("%03d", 62)
they both give:
"062"
Regards,
Rob Craig
Rapid Deployment Software
http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
3. Re: sprintf(): different output on Windows and Linux
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
> > sprintf("%03s", {"62"})
> >
> > on Windows: "062"
> > on Linux: " 62" (a blank space instead of zero)
> >
> > Why? It's supposed to produce the same output on both, isn't it?
>
> The "leading zeros" feature of printf/sprintf is really meant
> for numeric data, not strings, so I guess the C printf() library
> routines that Euphoria depends on, are not compatible in
> this unusual case.
>
> If you do:
> sprintf("%03d", 62)
> they both give:
> "062"
>
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
Yes, I'm aware of being meant for numeric data. I'm using the function to create
name files from strings (not numbers) that when displayed with dir/ls commands
are listed alphabetically (004, 011, 032, and not 11, 32, 4) and when I tried on
Linux they appeared as "\ 0", "\ 1", "\ 2", etc.
It doesn't really matter since I can convert the strings to numeric format
before passing them to sprintf() function, but I want to know what it may be
caused by.
Thanks.
JG
4. Re: sprintf(): different output on Windows and Linux
Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
>
> Robert Craig wrote:
> >
> > Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
> > > sprintf("%03s", {"62"})
> > >
> > > on Windows: "062"
> > > on Linux: " 62" (a blank space instead of zero)
> > >
> > > Why? It's supposed to produce the same output on both, isn't it?
> >
> > The "leading zeros" feature of printf/sprintf is really meant
> > for numeric data, not strings, so I guess the C printf() library
> > routines that Euphoria depends on, are not compatible in
> > this unusual case.
> >
> > If you do:
> > sprintf("%03d", 62)
> > they both give:
> > "062"
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rob Craig
> > Rapid Deployment Software
> > <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
>
> Yes, I'm aware of being meant for numeric data. I'm using the function to
> create
> name files from strings (not numbers) that when displayed with dir/ls commands
> are listed alphabetically (004, 011, 032, and not 11, 32, 4) and when I tried
> on Linux they appeared as "\ 0", "\ 1", "\ 2", etc.
>
> It doesn't really matter since I can convert the strings to numeric format
> before
> passing them to sprintf() function, but I want to know what it may be caused
> by.
>
> Thanks.
>
> JG
Hi there,
That's very interesting and maybe good you brought this up.
For my own purposes, i'm pretty sure i always use
sprintf("%s", {"62"})
or something like that, with no numbers before the 's'.
Take care,
Al
And, good luck with your Euphoria programming!
My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"
From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."
5. Re: sprintf(): different output on Windows and Linux
- Posted by Chris Burch <chriscrylex at aol.com>
Apr 05, 2006
-
Last edited Apr 06, 2006
Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
>
> sprintf("%03s", {"62"})
>
> on Windows: "062"
> on Linux: " 62" (a blank space instead of zero)
>
> Why? It's supposed to produce the same output on both, isn't it?
Yes it is. The windows one is wrong (AFAIK)
if you want a printed field of 3, and only 3 characters, you should use %3.3s.
if you want it justified to the left you should use %-3.3s.
The leading zero is generally only used with digits, so with strings the number
03 should be interpreted as 3, whereas with a number it should be interpreted as
'fill up empty spaces with zeros' - I think!
Chris
http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/euphoria.htm
http://uboard.proboards32.com/
http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/EUSQLite/eusql.html
6. Re: sprintf(): different output on Windows and Linux
Chris Burch wrote:
>
> Julio C. Galaret Viera wrote:
> >
> > sprintf("%03s", {"62"})
> >
> > on Windows: "062"
> > on Linux: " 62" (a blank space instead of zero)
> >
> > Why? It's supposed to produce the same output on both, isn't it?
>
> Yes it is. The windows one is wrong (AFAIK)
>
> if you want a printed field of 3, and only 3 characters, you should use %3.3s.
> if you want it justified to the left you should use %-3.3s.
>
> The leading zero is generally only used with digits, so with strings the
> number
> 03 should be interpreted as 3, whereas with a number it should be interpreted
> as 'fill up empty spaces with zeros' - I think!
>
> Chris
>
>
> <a
> href="http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/euphoria.htm">http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/euphoria.htm</a>
> <a href="http://uboard.proboards32.com/">http://uboard.proboards32.com/</a>
> <a
> href="http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/EUSQLite/eusql.html">http://members.aol.com/chriscrylex/EUSQLite/eusql.html</a>
As you say, «generally» used with numbers, but in this case I have sequences
with characters from 0 to 9. So I didn't know what the behaviour of the sprint()
function would be if I mixed a format string designed to be used with numbers and
a sequence.
The reason I did that way (that is, not using the correct format string for
sequences you mention) is that being files, I don't want leading blank spaces at
the begining of their names.
After realizing (on Windows) that the output was the same as expected with
numbers, I decided to use it without converting the strings to numbers.
To my surprise when I ported the program to Linux, file names were created the
other way. The OS wisely puts a "\" at the begining of the name, but the "\" sign
in front of a file name puts me a litle nervous.
I also think the function behaviour on Linux is what one may expect according to
the normal use of sprintf()... but Windows doesn't think so!
JG
