Re: Re: proposal: a width specification for s specifier (format function), fix behave when positional and ordered placeholders are used

Hello

2013/1/29 Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On 29 January 2013 08:19, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> * The width field is optional, even if the '-' flag is specified. So
>> '%-s' is perfectly legal and should be interpreted as '%s'. The
>> current implementation treats it as a width of 0, which is wrong.
>>
>
> Oh, but of course a width of 0 is the same as no width at all, so the
> current code is correct after all. That's what happens if I try to
> write emails before I've had my caffeine :-)
>
> I think my other points remain valid though. It would still be neater
> to parse the flags separately from the width field, and then all
> literal numbers that appear in the format should be positive.

I am sending rewritten code

It indirect width "*" and "*n$" is supported. It needs little bit more code.

There are a new question

what should be result of

format(">>%2$*1$s<<", NULL, "hello")

???

raise exception now, but I am able to modify to some agreement

Regards

Pavel

>
> Regards,
> Dean