On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 10:39 AM Vincent Lefevre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Stefan, > > On 2022-05-24 10:07:43 +0300, Stefan Puiu wrote: > > On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 8:33 AM Vincent Lefevre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > diff --git a/man3/printf.3 b/man3/printf.3 > > > index 4fa1f11f3..a231d626c 100644 > > > --- a/man3/printf.3 > > > +++ b/man3/printf.3 > > > @@ -503,6 +503,17 @@ argument, or a following > > > conversion corresponds to a pointer to > > > .I wchar_t > > > argument. > > > +On a following > > > +.BR a , > > > +.BR A , > > > +.BR e , > > > +.BR E , > > > +.BR f , > > > +.BR F , > > > +.BR g , > > > +or > > > +.B G > > > +conversion, this length modifier is ignored (C99; not in SUSv2). > > > > I'm not a native English speaker, but I think "Following a ... > > conversion" sounds better, unless I misunderstand the phrase. > > "Following a ... conversion" would mean the opposite, while it is > the conversion that follows the length modifier. Moreover, I wrote > "a following ... conversion" because this is what is always written > in this section on the length modifier, under the form "A following > ... conversion corresponds to ...". OK, now I think I understand what you mean. I guess "a following ... conversion" (used all over that man page, as you said) sounds a bit weird to me, though it might be proper English, I don't know. Sorry for the noise. Stefan. > > -- > Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> > 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> > Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
