On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 21:00:17 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>> @dholmes-ora could I trouble you for a sponsor? Thanks!
>
> @TheShermanTanker Working on a similar cleanup, and wonder if is it correct
> to assume that the "snprintf" adds "nul" even in case of error.
> For example, this code was
On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:34:25 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Looks good. Thanks.
>
> @dholmes-ora could I trouble you for a sponsor? Thanks!
@TheShermanTanker Working on a similar cleanup, and wonder if is it correct to
assume that the "snprintf" adds "nul" even in case of error.
For example,
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022 02:01:12 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Julian Waters has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains five additional
>>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 11:59:55 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> The C99 snprintf is available with Visual Studio 2015 and above, alongside
>> Windows 10 and the UCRT, and is no longer identical to the outdated Windows
>> _snprintf. Since support for the Visual C++ 2017 compiler was removed a
>>
On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 11:59:55 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> The C99 snprintf is available with Visual Studio 2015 and above, alongside
>> Windows 10 and the UCRT, and is no longer identical to the outdated Windows
>> _snprintf. Since support for the Visual C++ 2017 compiler was removed a
>>
> The C99 snprintf is available with Visual Studio 2015 and above, alongside
> Windows 10 and the UCRT, and is no longer identical to the outdated Windows
> _snprintf. Since support for the Visual C++ 2017 compiler was removed a while
> ago, we can now safely remove the compatibility workaround
