On 11/23/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Marko Kreen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 11/23/07, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Why?  I can't imagine any real use for it.  If you're thinking that
> >> it could provide a guide as to what to resize the buffer to, think
> >> again.
> >  If the output was truncated due to this limit then the return
> >  value is the number of characters (not including the trailing
> >  '\0') which would have been written to the final string if
> >  enough space had  been  available.
> > What problem do you see?
> The problem is that you are quoting from some particular system's
> manual, and not any kind of standard ... much less any standard that
> every platform we support follows.
> The real-world situation is that we are lucky to be able to tell
> vsnprintf success from failure at all :-(

Ah, ok.

I just saw the result used inside the function, so I thought
it is standard enough.

Actually, the meaning could be changed to *needmore
and compensated inside function:

 *needmore = (nprinted < buf->maxlen) ? buf->maxlen : nprinted + 1;

Then it would not matter if libc is conforming or not.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings

Reply via email to