Thanks! christos
> On Apr 28, 2019, at 10:33 PM, Robert Elz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 08:58:43 +0700 > From: Robert Elz <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > > | I know what is happening with that, and I will fix... > | > | The problem relates to a difference of opinion/misunderstanding > | of the 'F' (new style) format operator > | > | The man page says... > | > | Describes a multi-bit field like `f', but just extracts the value > | > | and when we look at 'f', what it says is ... > | > | Describes a multi-bit field [....] > | The remaining characters are printed ... > | > | If F is just like f then it needs "remaining characters" even though > | the F format doesn't use them. > > Upon reflection, I'm inclined to instead leave the fixed code the > way it is, and change the ATF tests to use it that way (omitting the > noise bytes after F format that it currently supplies for this purpose). > > kre
