Browse thread
Request for comments: Printf list conversion
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Hendrik Tews <tews@t...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Request for comments: Printf list conversion |
Bill Wood <william.wood3@comcast.net> writes:
I'm always inspired in my hacks by Common Lisp's (format...) form, which
includes a ~{/~} pair containing conversion directives and that consumes
a list argument. I don't want to appall you with complexity too soon,
but when you think about this, consider the possibility that the list is
a list of lists, each of which contains several items that are to be
formatted using a a recursively specified (sub) format. This does
enhance usability a great deal. I'm sure that there are people who will
yelp in protest at this, but I do recommend looking at CL's format as at
least one point in this design space.
I doubt anybody will yelp. Having a printf format for 'a list it
is just natural to permit arbitrary formats for the 'a elements
of the list. Therefore I would suggest something like
Printf.bprintf buf "int pair list: %[(%d, %d) %]" [ 1;2;3;4;5 ]
Here %[ is the list format and everything inbetween %[ and %] is
the format for the list elements (like the %{ .. %} format).
It remains to deal with separators that you don't want to print
after the last element. Maybe this could be solved by permitting
flags for %], like
- flag space "% ]": use space separator, omitted after the last
element
- flag comma "%,]": similar for comma
- flag s "%s]": use next argument as format and interpred
this format as separator
A flag that permits a format would also Virgile Prevosto problem:
Virgile Prevosto <virgile.prevosto@m4x.org> writes:
Le jeu 12 jan 2006 13:55:56 CET, Damien Doligez a écrit:
>
> Yuck. Isn't this type (formatter -> unit -> unit) isomorphic to string,
> in the absence of side-effects? Or do you really need separators that
> behave differently depending on the state of some reference?
>
With Format, yes: you may want to use the pretty-printing features of the
module, and for instance add a break hint after each element of the list.
Just use
Format.printf "int pair list: %[(%d, %d)%s]" [ 1;2;3;4;5 ] "@;<2 2>"
BTW, what is the common list solution for printing separators
just between the list elements?
Bye,
Hendrik