[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solari
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
[coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solaris 8 and 9 |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Dec 2010 13:14:10 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.9 |
Hi Paul,
> + * m4/printf.m4 (gl_SNPRINTF_RETVAL_C99): Also check for
> + snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) and (for good measure) snprintf (buf, 0, ...).
Thanks. Yet another *printf portability problem...
> * m4/snprintf.m4 (gl_FUNC_SNPRINTF): Also check gl_SNPRINTF_RETVAL_C99.
I disagree with this change: The module 'snprintf' was meant to merely
allow uses such as
char buf[80];
snprintf (buf, 80, some_wild_format, arguments);
If a user wants more from snprintf(), he needs to require 'snprintf-posix'.
The platforms on which this change introduces an snprintf() wrapper
although snprintf already exists are: Solaris 2.6..9, AIX 5.1, HP-UX 11,
IRIX 6.5, OSF/1 5.1.
coreutils already uses 'vasprintf-posix' and 'xprintf-posix'. It would
not bring in much more code to require also 'snprintf-posix'.
Bruno
- [coreutils] [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solaris 8 and 9, Paul Eggert, 2010/12/21
- [coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solaris 8 and 9,
Bruno Haible <=
- [coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solaris 8 and 9, Eric Blake, 2010/12/21
- [coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solaris 8 and 9, Paul Eggert, 2010/12/21
- [coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ... ) to Solaris 8 and 9, Bruno Haible, 2010/12/22
- [coreutils] Re: [PATCH] snprintf: port snprintf (NULL, 0, ...) to Solaris 8 and 9, Paul Eggert, 2010/12/22