Scanf Article

[Garion]

I was going to make a suggestion to improve the scanf article via the "contact us" link on the bottom of the webpage, but the I can't get the image for human verification to pop up on either firefox or internet explorer. (i disabled all blocking and everything else still nothing)

So i'll just post the suggestion here and hope the right person sees it.

I was trying to figure out how Scanf works and I was having trouble understanding the format. It was listed this way.

A format specifier for scanf follows this prototype:

%[*][width][length]specifier


On the article itself there is a specifier and subspecifier section and that was where my confusion came from.

I then read the printf article and the way it's tables are set up helped me understand what "values" go into the different parts of the prototype.

Ie.. the values that can go into the [width] sections or the values that can go into the [length] section.

I think it would be easier for people to understand just which values match up to which part of the prototype if the top of each table was labeled as the section of the prototype.

Ie the table name's could be labeled as "Specifier", "Width", "Length", "* (subspecifier)"

Then the values that could be listed in each section of the prototype would be listed in a table beneath the table names.

Just a suggestion for other people because it makes perfect sense to me now, it just seems like it would be easier to make that connection if the tables titles were changed a little.

The "length specifier" table on both the scanf and printf articles are a format like what I'm suggesting. but instead of labeling the table as "specifier" I'd label it as "Length" and change the "Length" column to another word like "Value" or "Specifier"

Hope that helps improve things and good day!

[Script Coder]

Odd I also tried but the human verification image does not appear. This topic would get more attention if you moved it to the lounge though. If enough members comment the site administrators might see it.

[Garion]

I wasn't sure if it was just me, but I suppose the human verification image might be another concern for an admin.