Fabien COELHO <coelho@cri.ensmp.fr> writes:
> This is a definite improvement.
> I like the lazyness between string & numeric forms, and for sorting, that
> is what was needed doing to have something clean.
> Applied on head, it works for me.
OK, pushed.
> While testing the patch I found a minor preexisting (mine...) bug: when
> string-scanning doubles, whether the whole string is consumed or not is
> not checked. This means that -D x=0one is interpreted as double 0.
> I came up with the attached check, but maybe there is a cleaner way to do
> that.
I like the way the zic code does it:
else /* type should be double */ { double dv;
! if (sscanf(var->value, "%lf", &dv) != 1) { fprintf(stderr, "malformed
variable\"%s\" value: \"%s\"\n",
--- 928,936 ---- else /* type should be double */ { double dv;
+ char xs;
! if (sscanf(var->value, "%lf%c", &dv, &xs) != 1) { fprintf(stderr,
"malformedvariable \"%s\" value: \"%s\"\n",
This relies on the idea that if there is any trailing junk, one character
will get assigned into "xs" and then sscanf will say it filled two fields.
Otherwise, it'll report filling only one field (or none, if there's
no number either). This requires only a minimal amount of code and no
extra strlen() calculations.
Neither way allows for trailing whitespace, though. I don't see that
that's important here.
regards, tom lane
