From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Numeric constants as strings Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:38:42 -0800 Message-ID: <7virdy8p25.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <200702190916.35813.andyparkins@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Parkins X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 19 10:39:09 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HJ4zE-0004fA-3w for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:39:08 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750797AbXBSJio (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:38:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750807AbXBSJio (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:38:44 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao106.cox.net ([68.230.241.40]:37525 "EHLO fed1rmmtao106.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750797AbXBSJio (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:38:44 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao106.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070219093843.OPPA21704.fed1rmmtao106.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:38:43 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id RMei1W00V1kojtg0000000; Mon, 19 Feb 2007 04:38:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200702190916.35813.andyparkins@gmail.com> (Andy Parkins's message of "Mon, 19 Feb 2007 09:16:34 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andy Parkins writes: > I'm working on bringing my hash width literals patch up to > date now that 1.5.0 has passed. It's all been trivial apart > from one line: > > #define HASH_WIDTH_ASCII 40 > - printf("%-40s %s%s (%d subtrees)\n", > + printf("%-" HASH_WIDTH_ASCII "s %s%s (%d subtrees)\n", > > This compiles, but I suspect that it's not going to do what I > want it to do. Doesn't writing "foo" "bar" (two string literals next to each other) tell the compiler to concatenate them?