LIU Hao wrote: > But that's not standard behavior. I think we're too late for such changes; > people who have been used to > the standard behavior would be annoyed.
Those %C and %S format specifiers are not part of standard C; they are however part of Single Unix Specification, and correspond to %lc and %ls respectively. IMO, there are zero reasons why anyone would use them in portable code since we have standardized %lc and %ls for this purpose. POSIX specification for printf: https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/printf.html Microsoft's printf functions also support %C and %S with incompatible meaning. See https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/c-runtime-library/format-specification-syntax-printf-and-wprintf-functions. Standard-conforming code should never use %C and %S since this is undefined behavior, so I don't really see compatibility issues here. IMO, providing consistent Microsoft behavior among all CRTs is a compatibility improvement. - Kirill Makurin _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
