Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Philip Guenther
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > On 2015-11-17, Jan Stary wrote: > >> I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers >> are "interpreted" by printf, not "interpolated", right? > > I think "interpolated" as a technical term is correct here. > (The Perl docu

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Christian Weisgerber
On 2015-11-17, Jan Stary wrote: > I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers > are "interpreted" by printf, not "interpolated", right? I think "interpolated" as a technical term is correct here. (The Perl documentation is very fond of it.) > using a function like > .Fn snprintf

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Richard Toohey
On 11/18/15 07:16, Amit Kulkarni wrote: jan is right, interpretation is the correct word. Interpolate is using something to do mathematically. the program is going to work on, so interpret... Interpolate is a word I picked up when learning Perl and to do with strings, not just mathematically:

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Theo de Raadt
> > > > i don;t know how these implementations work, so it's hard to say. > > > > perhaps they are interpolated. maybe use cvs to track down the author > > > > and ask them? > > > > > > > > whatever the outcome, if you want to change this text you probably want > > > > to adjust a few more: > > >

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Amit Kulkarni
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Jason McIntyre wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:14:33PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > > On Nov 17 17:06:11, j...@kerhand.co.uk wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:38:41AM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > > > > I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Ted Unangst
Jason McIntyre wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:14:33PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > > On Nov 17 17:06:11, j...@kerhand.co.uk wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:38:41AM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > > > > I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers > > > > are "interpreted" by printf,

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:14:33PM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > On Nov 17 17:06:11, j...@kerhand.co.uk wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:38:41AM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > > > I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers > > > are "interpreted" by printf, not "interpolated", right? > >

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Jan Stary
On Nov 17 17:06:11, j...@kerhand.co.uk wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:38:41AM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > > I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers > > are "interpreted" by printf, not "interpolated", right? > > > > Jan > > > > i don;t know how these implementations work,

Re: printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:38:41AM +0100, Jan Stary wrote: > I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers > are "interpreted" by printf, not "interpolated", right? > > Jan > i don;t know how these implementations work, so it's hard to say. perhaps they are interpolated. maybe u

printf(3) wording

2015-11-17 Thread Jan Stary
I am not a native speaker, but the conversion specifiers are "interpreted" by printf, not "interpolated", right? Jan Index: printf.3 === RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/stdio/printf.3,v retrieving revision 1.74 diff -u -p -r1.74