Hi, On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Uoti Urpala <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 21:55 +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> Uoti Urpala <[email protected]> writes: >> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 21:34 +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> >> It is not possible to get those semantics using the regular Windows >> >> functions. >> > >> > Of course it is, with enough workarounds (this is already an attempt at >> > a workaround, getting it right would just require more code). I think >> > there are rather obvious ways to fix both issues (besides the most >> > obvious but more work-requiring alternative of writing correct snprintf >> > from scratch): rewrite the format string with different modifiers for >> > the first, try printing the string into temporary storage and double its >> > size until you succeed for the second. >> >> Of course writing your own, correct snprintf() is possible. You are >> then, however, not using the Windows-provided functions. >> >> Writing into temp buffers is not exactly equivalent to the standard >> behaviour. The standard function can succeed in calculating the size >> that *would* be required even actually allocating it fails. > > Yes, it can have more failure cases. However, I meant that from a more > practical perspective. You can do that to get a correctly working > snprintf for practical use. > >> If you insist on arguing, I politely request that you at least be right. > > If you get to that level of completely literal nitpicking, you could as > well say that it's possible to "get those semantics using the regular > Windows functions" by writing your own snprintf from scratch, while > using the regular Windows functions for something other than doing the > main formatting. I don't think that's a meaningful discussion any more > though.
And this discussion is so utterly useful as-is, right? I've asked this a few times now: please stay out of discussions on MSVC support. You're not interested in it, you're not intending to contribute to it or help out in any way, and you're not commonly a Libav contributor who would provide constructive reviews, so to the best of my definitions, you're just here to troll. Let's not. Leave it to the people that care. Ronald _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
