Re: zcal bug

[Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:55:32 +0400
sergio <mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > printf %g format.
> 
> Sorry, I confused it with %f.

I have to say it confused *me* working out what a sensible default was.
You really want something like a really calculator does, but that's (I
suppose, I don't know what the firmware looks like) presumably taking
some arbitrary number of significant figures that they've worked out
will be correct for the precision used internally.  For a slightly more
general purpose programmer's tool like zcalc, sticking with the standard
formats available seemed a more obvious thing to do.  %g looked like the
least worst option.

pws