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: | Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@b...> |
| Subject: | Request for comments: Printf list conversion |
I would like to transform the following rather vague idea into a formal feature
request. Before doing this, I would like to know what others think about it.
I continually come across the need to pretty-print via Printf a list of
values--for example, let's say an int list. Printf has conversion specifiers for
int, but int list cannot be handled easily. What I usually end up doing is
converting values in the list to strings, concatenate them, and output the
result with the %s conversion specifier.
Printf.bprintf buf "A beatiful list of ints: [ %s ]\n" (String.concat " ;"
(List.map string_of_int [ 1;2;3;4;5 ] )
Obviously, this is radically ineffiecient. A better solution might be the following.
Printf.bprintf buf "A beatiful list of ints: [ %t ]\n" (fun buf ->
List.iter (Printf.bprintf buf " %d;") [ 1;2;3;4;5 ]
)
The above is adequately fast, but terribly ugly.
I believe that it should be possible to add a conversion-flag--let me use '&' as
an example--telling the type-system and the Printf module that the corresponding
parameter is a list of values whose type is determined by the
conversion-specifier proper. Let me show what I would like to be able to write:
Printf.bprintf buf "A beatiful list of ints: [ %&d ]\n" [ 1;2;3;4;5 ]
Here, the &-flag would tell the type-system that the first parameter is an 'a
list. The fact that 'a = int is to be inferred from the actual conversion
specifier ('d'). Upon recognizing a %& conversion, Printf would have to iterate
over the corresponding parameter with the appropriate conversion
(format_int_with_conv, in this case).
Now, of course, the '&' conversion-flag does not settle the issue, as a
parameter like the first one of String.concat would also be needed. Another
issue which is brought up by the idea I have jotted down is how to handle
conversions like '%&a' and '%&t'.
What do you guys think about all this?
Alex