Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email> writes: >> As a design question, what should "Trunc" do in such a case now? I >> do not think we can still call it "hard truncate" if the feature >> gives "[][]" (i.e. fill only 4 display columns, resulting in a >> string that is not wide enough) or "[][][]" (i.e. exceed 5 columns >> that are given), but of course chomping a letter in the middle is >> not acceptable behaviour, so ... > The design had already covered those cases. The author already had those > thoughts Sorry, I was saying that none of * giving only [][] to fill only 4 display columns, without filling the given 5 display columns, * giving [][][] to fill 6 display columns, exceeding the given 5 display columns, * giving [][][ that chomps a letter in the middle, in a failed attempt to fill exactly 5 displya columns. would be a sensible design of the behaviour for "Trunc", so I am not sure what "had already covered" really mean...
