On Friday, March 31, 2006 09:27:01 AM -0500 Jim Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I still don't see why the code is so complicated. Can you think of any reason not to use a single scanf like I did for the 8601 method?
I think they're trying to be careful about rejecting invalid input. Without the second sscanf, it would accept input like "2/22/2006,12:30" but ignore the "12:30" part.
'c' is a local string of length two so I don't see how you could get scribbling.
Because the format string includes a %d for seconds with no corresponding input argument, so sscanf will try to store an integer at 'c'. A string of length two is not big enough to receive an integer on most platforms.
This lacks sufficient validation; specifically, it doesn't include a dummy field to tell if there was extra garbage at the end of the input. I didn't think that was necessary, but until it parses timezone info it's probably better to check for unexpected input.
Noting what I said above, I think it's rather important to check for unexpected input, rather than doing something different from what the user (or program) that invoked us intended.
-- Jeff _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
