From: Neil Korpusik (Neil.Korpusik@sun.com)
Date: Wed Feb 09 2005 - 18:06:22 PST
Steven Sharp wrote:
>
> The current specification in the LRM is lacking, and should be clarified.
> This assumes that we can agree on what to specify. What XL does makes
> reasonable sense, and is the de facto standard. I don't see a reason to
> specify anything else.
>
I agree with this characterization. The LRM should definitely be
clarified. Since XL is only performing this transformation on an
ASCII 0 it seems reasonable to me as well. Like Shalom said, if
you don't want to see the leading spaces you can always use %0s.
I assume that there are many people out there relying on an
ASCII 0 that is embedded within a string to be displayed as a blank.
Retaining that behavior seems to be the right thing to do. And then
if the embedded ASCII 0's are to be converted into a space any
leading ASCII 0's should be treated in a consistent manner.
BTW: I am also on the alias.
Neil
-- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Neil Korpusik Tel: 408-720-4852 Staff Engineer Fax: 408-720-4850 Frontend Technologies - ASICs & Processors (FTAP) Sun Microsystems email: neil.korpusik@sun.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Wed Feb 09 2005 - 17:48:15 PST
and
sponsored by Boyd Technology, Inc.