On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 6:06 AM, Simon Rozman <si...@rozman.si> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > From a technical point of view, it looks like a fine patch. But it is
> hard
> > for me
> > (as a non-Windows dev) to understand *why* this is needed.
> > It would be good to explain the rationale for a change so others can
> > understand it as quickly as possible.
>
> snwprintf() is not defined in Windows SDK. _snwprintf() is.
> [https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/c-runtime-library/
> reference/snprintf-snprintf-snprintf-l-snwprintf-snwprintf-l]
>
> Mingw probably accepts both. That's why nobody noticed. Looking around
> OpenVPN
> code, I have found some code using _snwprintf(), some snwprintf().
> Probably,
> since MSVC was neglected for so long, nobody paid attention to such a
> subtle
> difference.
>
> For the code to compile on MSVC all snwprintf() should be replaced with
> _snwprintf(). Or, since the prefix underscore imposed by Windows SDK is not
> mostly aesthetical, the following #define could be introduced:
> #ifdef _MSVC_VER
> #define snwprintf _snwprintf
> #endif
>
> Nevertheless, I suggest consistent use of snwprintf/_snwprintf.
>
While its true that mingw accepts both and Windows has only the latter, I
think the best option here is swprintf. Its ISO-C, does the same thing as
_snwprintf with added advantage that nul-termination is guaranteed by the
standard (though we need not bank on that and better continue the practice
of explicit nul termination). Note that swprintf is like snprintf in that
it takes the buffer size as an argument.
Selva
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Openvpn-devel mailing list
Openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-devel
