Re: dtrace: give %'d a chance?

On 02/12/2020 18:52, Mark Johnston wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 03:50:53PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>> On 19/11/2020 16:57, Mark Johnston wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 19, 2020 at 01:28:56PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> what do people think about adding
>>>>     setlocale(LC_NUMERIC, "");
>>>> to dtrace's main function?
>>>
>>> That seems reasonable to me.
>>>
>>>> My primary interest is to (pretty-)print some numbers with a thousands separator.
>>>>
>>>> Not sure if any other LC_ types are worth bothering.
>>>
>>> Maybe LC_TIME?  libdtrace a couple of date formatters, %T and %Y.  A
>>> locale-aware formatter might be worth having.
>>
>> FWIW, I've just discovered that despite what
>> http://dtrace.org/guide/chp-fmt.html says about %Y its output is not dependent
>> on locale settings.
>> A quick look at the code confirms that -- pfprint_time uses ctime_r.
>> But %T (undocumented at the above link) indeed depends on LC_TIME as
>> pfprint_time822 uses strftime("%a, %d %b %G %T %Z").
>>
>> Sample output in C locale:
>> 10000000
>> Mon, 30 Nov 2020 13:47:24 UTC
>> 2020 Nov 30 13:47:24
>>
>> The same formats (%'d, %T, %Y) in uk_UA locale:
>> 10 000 000
>> Пн, 30 лист. 2020 13:43:11 UTC
>> 2020 Nov 30 13:43:11
> 
> So to be clear, there is nothing that needs to be done for time locales?

Sorry, it was I who was not clear.  The above output is after adding setlocale()
calls.  Stock dtrace always operates in C locale.

> In any case, I'm fine with adding the %'d formatter.

It's already there and it delegates the work to the C printf.
Hence the need for setlocale.

-- 
Andriy Gapon