Ah, I get it.  That third bullet mentions "long" and "unsigned long" but does not mention "double" in connection with the "l" (ell) format modifier.  With "scanf", on the other hand, they do mention "double."  Yukko!

John F. Fay
john.fay@eglin.af.mil
850-729-6330
-----Original Message-----
From: freeglut-developer-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:freeglut-developer-admin@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Richard Rauch

Sent: Monday, January 17, 2005 4:27 PM
To: freeglut-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: FW: [sforge@olib.org: Re: [Freeglut-developer] Some suggested cha nges to "freeglut" and its demo programs]

 [...]
> (8) The "%lf" may be found in K&R, 2nd edition, on page 244, third bullet.
> But if the old code gives compiler warnings, then we probably need to keep
> the fix.

Hm.  I've read that bulleted item a time or two and it still seems to me
that "%lf" is undefined, but "%ld" is defined, as is "%Lf".

Maybe we are using different printings and this was silently changed?
I have a 5th printing...


What I do find is that for scanf(), at the bottom of page 245, "%lf"
is specifically mentioned to indicate that the pointer is to a {double}.
(See the last sentence on page 245.)

--
  "I probably don't know what I'm talking about."  http://www.olib.org/~rkr/


-------------------------------------------------------
The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
_______________________________________________
Freeglut-developer mailing list
Freeglut-developer@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freeglut-developer