On 2022-05-24 15:23:33 +0300, Stefan Puiu wrote: > 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. It also sounds a bit weird to me (though this is grammatically correct), but FYI, the ISO C standard uses the same words: "Specifies that a following d, i, o, u, x, or X conversion specifier applies to [...]", etc. So I suppose that there isn't any problem with this. -- 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)
