On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 20:32 -0500, Jeff Squyres wrote: > > > Ah, ok. To be clear, is it accurate to say that it is one of the > > > following forms: > > > > > > - a hex number (without leading "0x" -- would "0x" be ignored if it is > > > supplied?) > > > > We never used 0x there. > > Ok. > > It might be good to safely ignore 0x if it's present, but that's a small > feature enhancement that can be done at any time (I filed a future ticket).
Maybe not relevant but it bit me so I'll say it here, using "%x" with sscanf on a string of "0x1" will match the whole thing and give a value of 1 on Linux but on Solaris it'll match the "0" as a hex value of 0 and not match the "x1" at all leading to further errors in subsequent matches as well. The most annoying thing is that sscanf() thinks it's matched and it's return code will be set accordingly. Ashley, -- Ashley Pittman, Bath, UK. Padb - A parallel job inspection tool for cluster computing http://padb.pittman.org.uk
