Subject: Re: number base printing conventions
To: Erik E. Fair <email@example.com>
From: Jonathan Stone <jonathan@DSG.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 07/28/1997 13:54:47
Erik E. Fair (Time Keeper) <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>NetBSD is not consistent about printing numbers.
>The short version is I'd like to see each place where we see %x or %p be
>replaced by 0x%x or 0x%p (or some other convention like appending
i) Doesn't the kernel printf() already prepend 0x to %p formats?
I'd sooner fix %p there, if at all possible.
ii) 'h'? Eeek! Doesn't printing a leading 0x for an appended 'h'
conflict with both ANSI and (if memory serves) an antique
x86 usage for `short'?
Or did you mean "%0xh"? Yuck. Your own GDB cut-and-paste
point argues strongly against that. Which do you really mean?
Plus, postfix radix notations are harder for humans to read than prefix.
iii) If we want a printf() format char for 0x prefixing,
what's wrong with "#%x" ? or even "0x%x"?