FRIGN wrote: > We are dealing with floats with at most 2 decimal places.
Heyho, in this case you could also argue, that this macro is only used to get an upper bound for the character size in st and not for the least upper bound and then use the even simpler version with CEIL(3.0) == 4. But, as this macro may be used by other contributors for other reasons we do not know yet and they could as well need more precision. If not in st, someone could copy the macro and fail horribly with his application. It is very misleading to define a macro which suggests to do the same thing as a well known standard library function does, but it indeed behaves differently in some cases. This definitely should be worth the -lm for correctness' sake. Otherwise you could just get rid of the misleading macro and use xw.cw = (int)dc.font.width * cwscale + 1; xw.ch = (int)dc.font.height * chscale + 1; instead, ignoring the maybe wasted pixel. --Markus
