Hi --

On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, mental / rydia.net wrote:

> Quoting "i.v.r." <ivanvega / gmail.com>:
>
>> What's wrong with sprintf? I don't see how sprintf is evil versus
>> the long procedure you detailed, but what do I know... I'm just a
>> BASIC programmer, LOL.
>
> There's nothing wrong with using sprintf (aka format) here.  It's
> just not the most readable or flexible solution in many other
> cases.
>
> Since sprintf() is lifted almost directly from C, recent converts
> from C do have a tendency to overuse it.  That and its distinctly
> C-ish flavor likely account for Harold's revulsion.
>
> Now, not being a former C programmer, you may not be so strongly
> tempted to write:
>
> sprintf("%s%s%s", a.zolum, b.fep, c.gorza)
>
> when you could have simply written:
>
> "#{a.zolum}#{b.fep}#{c.gorza}"
>
> ...but if you ever are, please be aware that it's worth TWO kittens.

I think one of the common rites of passage into Ruby is going from
this:

   printf("%s\n", string);

to this:

   puts string

:-)  Mind you, as a scanf author I do root for that family of methods
a bit.  scanf, when conditions allow its use, can actually save you a
lot of .to_i-ing and such.


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack / wobblini.net