[erlang-questions] Why ~n instead of n?

[Thomas Lindgren]

--- autophile <autophile@REDACTED> wrote:
> Does anyone know why there is a ~n in the io:fwrite
> format when n seems to work just as well? Is it
> there for historical reasons? Am I committing a sin
> by using n and could lightning strike my program
> dead under some obscure circumstance?

In addition to the previously listed reasons, ~n also
permits counted operations:

1> io:format("~3n", []).

Best,
Thomas



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time 
with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news