Richard Sharpe wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:22 PM, Richard Sharpe > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi folks, >> >> I have noticed some complaining about the lack of thousands separators >> on the ticks, especially on the vertical axis. Certainly, I find it a >> pain. >> >> The following patch might fix the problem. I don't currently have a >> capture that I can check this with. Perhaps tomorrow I will remember >> to bring one how that shows more than three digits ... >> >> [rsharpe@localhost wireshark]$ svn diff ui/gtk/tcp_graph.c >> Index: ui/gtk/tcp_graph.c >> =================================================================== >> --- ui/gtk/tcp_graph.c (revision 43186) >> +++ ui/gtk/tcp_graph.c (working copy) >> @@ -2767,7 +2767,7 @@ >> break; >> y = y - floor (y); >> } >> - g_snprintf (str, sizeof(str), "%.*f", rdigits, label); >> + g_snprintf (str, sizeof(str), "%'*f", rdigits, label); >> switch (dir) { >> case AXIS_HORIZONTAL: >> layout = >> gtk_widget_create_pango_layout(axis->g->drawing_area, >> > > Nope. I was wrong. This does it. Can someone commit it? Do I have to > create a bug?: > > Index: ui/gtk/io_stat.c > =================================================================== > --- ui/gtk/io_stat.c (revision 43186) > +++ ui/gtk/io_stat.c (working copy) > @@ -962,14 +962,14 @@ > if(draw_y_as_time){ > print_time_scale_string(label_string, > 15, value, value, TRUE); > } else { > - g_snprintf(label_string, 15, "%d", > value); > + g_snprintf(label_string, 15, "%'d", > value); > } > } else { > value = (max_y/10)*i; > if(draw_y_as_time){ > print_time_scale_string(label_string, > 15, value, max_y, FALSE); > } else { > - g_snprintf(label_string, 15, "%d", > value); > + g_snprintf(label_string, 15, "%'d", > value); > } > }
Bugs are always better, and I see you opened bug 7389 for this. But: a quick search for "printf apostrophe portable" brought me here: http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t442370-portability-issues-with-flag-in-printf.html which indicates that using the apostrophe isn't really portable. Folllow-ups to the bug. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
