Backport #1195: String#% does not include prefix before zero value for # versions of numeric formats

• Status changed from Open to Rejected

Tanaka Akira wrote:
> In article <[e-mail]>,
>   Charles Nutter <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
>> Bug #1195: String#% does not include prefix before zero value for # versions of numeric formats
> 
> It's intentional.

So then the Ruby 1.8 behavior is a bug. Can we move the bug to Ruby 1.8? 
I think the title and description don't even need to be changed.

I have added a spec for this behavior with a 1.9 guard, but I could 
remove that guard and make it a ruby_bug instead.

- Charlie

Akinori MUSHA wrote:
> When 0b0, 0B0, 00, 0x0, and 0X0 are all perfectly human readable and
> machine parsable, I'm not sure if we should tag it a bug and get it
> fixed in any of those 1.8 branches at the cost of breaking
> compatibilities.
> 
> How does it work in JRuby 1.8?

We implemented our own sprintf that matches Ruby (and in places, C) 
behavior. We can make it work either way. Currently there's logic that 
chooses the 1.8 behavior in 1.8 mode and the 1.9 behavior in 1.9 mode.

I primarily ask because either there's a reason it changed (in which 
case 1.8 should eventually change too) or there's no reason it changed 
(in which case...why did it change?). It would be easier to maintain one 
behavior and not have the move from 1.8 to 1.9 behave differently.

Hi,

In message "Re: [ruby-core:22406] Re: [Bug #1195] String#% does not include prefix before zero value for # versions of numeric formats"
    on Tue, 24 Feb 2009 16:09:03 +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter <[e-mail]> writes:

|I primarily ask because either there's a reason it changed (in which 
|case 1.8 should eventually change too) or there's no reason it changed 
|(in which case...why did it change?). It would be easier to maintain one 
|behavior and not have the move from 1.8 to 1.9 behave differently.

Ruby 1.8 uses underlying sprintf() where 1.9 uses its own
implementation.  So, in short, choose 1.9 behavior.

							matz.

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> Ruby 1.8 uses underlying sprintf() where 1.9 uses its own
> implementation.  So, in short, choose 1.9 behavior.

Given that, I think leaving it specified as a new behavior in 1.9 is 
best. (i.e. 1.8 behavior is not a bug, since it's just default sprintf).

- Charlie

Hi,

In message "Re: [ruby-core:22421] Re: [Bug #1195] String#% does not include prefix before zero value for # versions of numeric formats"
    on Wed, 25 Feb 2009 02:38:55 +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter <[e-mail]> writes:

|Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
|> Ruby 1.8 uses underlying sprintf() where 1.9 uses its own
|> implementation.  So, in short, choose 1.9 behavior.
|
|Given that, I think leaving it specified as a new behavior in 1.9 is 
|best. (i.e. 1.8 behavior is not a bug, since it's just default sprintf).

It's up to you.  1.8 behavior is not a bug, it's just one of
implementation dependent behavior of sprintf() on your platform, as
far as I understand.  1.8 may work like 1.9 on some platforms.

							matz.

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> It's up to you.  1.8 behavior is not a bug, it's just one of
> implementation dependent behavior of sprintf() on your platform, as
> far as I understand.  1.8 may work like 1.9 on some platforms.

Thank you for the clarification. I'll talk with Brian about how best to 
represent this in the specs.

- Charlie