* Bruno Haible:
> Florian Weimer wrote:
>> The standards do not provide a way to report errors for malformed format
>> strings. I think the current behavior is acceptable, all things
>> considered.
>
> OK, then I'm fine with Assaf's approach to create a new, separate function
> that does only the
Florian Weimer wrote:
> The standards do not provide a way to report errors for malformed format
> strings. I think the current behavior is acceptable, all things
> considered.
OK, then I'm fine with Assaf's approach to create a new, separate function
that does only the syntax checking.
Bruno
* Bruno Haible:
> [CCing Florian Weimer.
> Florian, the thread started at
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2018-12/msg00149.html ]
>
> Assaf Gordon wrote:
>> The comment even says:
>>/* Unknown format; output the format, including the '%',
>> since this is most lik
Ben Pfaff wrote:
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 09:22:17AM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
(Using ptrdiff_t is part of my campaign to prefer ptrdiff_t to size_t. While
we're at it, let's change the other size_t args to ptrdiff_t, but I
digress)
Have you said anything about this campaign elsewhere? I'd
On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 09:22:17AM -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> (Using ptrdiff_t is part of my campaign to prefer ptrdiff_t to size_t. While
> we're at it, let's change the other size_t args to ptrdiff_t, but I
> digress)
Have you said anything about this campaign elsewhere? I'd like to hear
m
I suspect that changing this behavior would be a disruptive
backwards-incompatible change (but other opinions are welcomed).
I wouldn't mind a change as long as it changes the API enough so that compilers
complain if we don't also update the calling code. For example, nstrftime could
take an a
On 2018-12-28 11:08 p.m., Bruno Haible wrote:
[CCing Florian Weimer.
Florian, the thread started at
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2018-12/msg00149.html ]
Assaf Gordon wrote:
The comment even says:
/* Unknown format; output the format, including the '%',
since
[CCing Florian Weimer.
Florian, the thread started at
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2018-12/msg00149.html ]
Assaf Gordon wrote:
> The comment even says:
>/* Unknown format; output the format, including the '%',
> since this is most likely the right thing to do if
Hello Bruno,
On 2018-12-28 9:34 a.m., Bruno Haible wrote:
This function enables syntax-check of the format string.
First question: Should this syntax-check be integrated into the
nstrftime() and fprintftime() functions? These functions are gnulib
inventions, therefore they could be extended to
Hi Assaf,
> This function enables syntax-check of the format string.
First question: Should this syntax-check be integrated into the
nstrftime() and fprintftime() functions? These functions are gnulib
inventions, therefore they could be extended to return
- an error indicator (maybe EINVAL?),
Hello,
I'd like to suggest the following new module: fprintftime-check.
It uses the same infrastructure as fprintftime
(i.e. #include "nstrtime,c") to implement a new function:
int fprintftime_check (const char *format, const char** err_ptr);
This function enables syntax-check of the format s
11 matches
Mail list logo
