Hi, Bruno, it was a FYI. Is providing some extra information (since Marcin mentioned he wanted his language to be portable to Windows) wrong? I was not arguing which format string was more reasonable, or standards-conformant. Just some information in case one wants one's application portable to Windows (using some `native' compiler like MinGW).
Microsoft never claims POSIX conformance for Win32. Not even full C99 support. Best regards, Wu Yongwei > > FYI, what MSDN says about the types in printf/wprintf: > > This is not only irrelevant, it is also wrong. "%S" is less portable > than "%ls". The standard directive for wchar_t* strings is "%ls". And > your cited description of "%s" has two errors. > > Read the Linux wprintf(3) manual page. Or read the ISO C 99 text, or > the equivalent portion of POSIX:2001, at > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/functions/wprintf.html -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
