> This was not a part of the PR and is completely cosmetic (surely it
> supports plain %x if it does support %#x).  Why was this necessary?
> (I know I would be quite miffed if someone made a change like that to
> my code).

Yes, that %x formatting change was not part of the PR, but I only changed 0x%x 
not plain %x.
I did it because as I was fixing the 0x%x in the log, I started changing them 
to %#jx so I did it
globally in that directory for consistency. It found two formats that were 
 So one can view it as a format consistency checker(not just cosmetic).


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Reply via email to