Re: [PATCH] t7422: remove extraneous argument to printf

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I am terribly sorry. It seems GMail auto-formats the email to a specific
line length, even when explicitly instructed to not do so. In my
previous email, it auto-formatted the printf statements.

Please ignore the formatting error.

Regrettably,
S.

On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 9:59 PM Subhaditya Nath <sn03.general@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 10:35 PM Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > [...] for the sake of consistency and to match the author's original
> > intent, it may make more sense to retain the argument to printf and
> > instead employ `%d`.
>
> I see.
>
> The problem is, there are multiple ways the printf statement could be
> written -
>
> 1)      printf "[submodule \"sm-$i\"]\npath = recursive-submodule-path-$i\n"
> 2)      printf "[submodule \"sm-$i\"]\npath =
> recursive-submodule-path-%d\n" "$i"
> 3)      printf "[submodule \"sm-%d\"]\npath =
> recursive-submodule-path-$i\n" "$i"
> 4)      printf "[submodule \"sm-%d\"]\npath =
> recursive-submodule-path-%d\n" "$i" "$i"
>
> Which one of these is to be used?
> I shall update the patch with the approach that is decided upon.
>
>
> Respectfully,
> S.
>
>
> P.S. Sorry for the delay in replying. I got caught up in something...





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux