On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 12:29 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`. > > 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? The final (#4) seems most natural.
