«

the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
"%f" or "%lf" or both?

for example
printf("%f", (double)0.0);
printf("%lf", (double)0.0);
are both ok?

Good morning
Thank you

it seems like that in c there is no need to print a double varible
with %lf format
%f is ok
but for long interger , u should use %ld

RoS wrote:
> the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
> "%f" or "%lf" or both?
>
> for example
> printf("%f", (double)0.0);
> printf("%lf", (double)0.0);
> are both ok?
>
> Good morning
> Thank you

RoS wrote:
> the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
> "%f" or "%lf" or both?
>
> for example
> printf("%f", (double)0.0);
> printf("%lf", (double)0.0);
> are both ok?
>
Yes they are equivalent, the l modifier has no effect for the f specifier.

--
Ian Collins.

Ian Collins wrote:
>
> RoS wrote:
> > the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
> > "%f" or "%lf" or both?
> >
> > for example
> > printf("%f", (double)0.0);
> > printf("%lf", (double)0.0);
> > are both ok?
> >
> Yes they are equivalent,
> the l modifier has no effect for the f specifier.

That's the case for C99.
For C89,
a function call to printf is undefined
if "%lf" is the first argument.

--
pete

On Dec 3, 3:49 pm, pete <pfil...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Ian Collins wrote:
>
> > RoS wrote:
> > > the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
> > > "%f" or "%lf" or both?
>
> > > for example
> > > printf("%f", (double)0.0);
> > > printf("%lf", (double)0.0);
> > > are both ok?
>
> > Yes they are equivalent,
> > the l modifier has no effect for the f specifier.
>
> That's the case for C99.
> For C89,
> a function call to printf is undefined
> if "%lf" is the first argument.

The first? "%d %lf" is not undefined?

writes:
> On Dec 3, 3:49 pm, pete <pfil...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> Ian Collins wrote:
>>
>> > RoS wrote:
>> > > the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
>> > > "%f" or "%lf" or both?
>>
>> > > for example
>> > > printf("%f", (double)0.0);
>> > > printf("%lf", (double)0.0);
>> > > are both ok?
>>
>> > Yes they are equivalent,
>> > the l modifier has no effect for the f specifier.
>>
>> That's the case for C99.
>> For C89,
>> a function call to printf is undefined
>> if "%lf" is the first argument.
>
> The first? "%d %lf" is not undefined?

Yes, "%d %lf" is undefined for C89/C90's printf. He said "if", not
"if and only if".

(Incidentally, given printf("%d %lf", x, y), the first *argument*
isn't %d; it's the string "%d %ld".)

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) <kst->
Looking for software development work in the San Diego area.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"

In article <>,
pete <> wrote:
>Ian Collins wrote:
>>
>> RoS wrote:
>> > the format for conversion of double in the function printf is
>> > "%f" or "%lf" or both?

>> Yes they are equivalent,
>> the l modifier has no effect for the f specifier.

>That's the case for C99.
>For C89,
>a function call to printf is undefined
>if "%lf" is the first argument.

And just to confuse matters, in C89, "%Lf" *is* defined and
indicates that the corresponding argument is long double .
--
"There are some ideas so wrong that only a very intelligent person
could believe in them." -- George Orwell