On 2017-07-25 10:47, Brian Inglis wrote:
> On 2017-07-24 17:18, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> On 24.07.2017 15:51, Brian Inglis wrote:
>>> On 2017-07-24 15:02, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
Am 24.07.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]:
> rather it's a question about porta
On 2017-07-24 17:18, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> On 24.07.2017 15:51, Brian Inglis wrote:
>> On 2017-07-24 15:02, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
>>> Am 24.07.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]:
>>>
rather it's a question about portability of code that
uses %s for both functi
On 24.07.2017 15:51, Brian Inglis wrote:
On 2017-07-24 15:02, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
Am 24.07.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]:
rather it's a question about portability of code that
uses %s for both functions and expects it to work unchanged in the
Cygwin environ
On 2017-07-24 15:02, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> Am 24.07.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]:
>
>> rather it's a question about portability of code that
>> uses %s for both functions and expects it to work unchanged in the
>> Cygwin environment.
>
> And the answer to t
On 2017-07-24 15:48, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 07/24/2017 04:28 PM, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>>> then its use of %s in either of those functions constitutes a _bug_
>>
>> Oh really? Is that why "%s" was added to Cygwin's strftime() lately?
>
> Your mailer is breaking up threads, w
On 07/24/2017 04:28 PM, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
>> then its use of %s in either of those functions constitutes a _bug_
>
> Oh really? Is that why "%s" was added to Cygwin's strftime() lately?
Your mailer is breaking up threads, which is making it very annoying to
follow where
> then its use of %s in either of those functions constitutes a _bug_
Oh really? Is that why "%s" was added to Cygwin's strftime() lately?
Thanks again for your input.
Anton Lavrentiev
Contractor NIH/NLM/NCBI
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: htt
Am 24.07.2017 um 04:09 schrieb Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C]:
rather it's a question about portability of code that
uses %s for both functions and expects it to work unchanged in the
Cygwin environment.
And the answer to that question is: such code _is_not_portable_, and
therefore th
On 23.07.2017 19:09, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
But that's just scanning a decimal integer to time_t.
It's not a question of whether I can or can't convert a string into an
integer, rather it's a question about portability of code that uses %s
for both functions and expects it
> Demand. I patches strftime to add %s because Coreutils wanted it. But
> coreutils doesn't use strptime, so I had no reason to add it.
Well, I was bringing up a point of API inconsistency, hoping that it'd serve as
an
implicit request for an improvement so that strptime() gets its "%s"...
May
On 07/24/2017 08:24 AM, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
But that's just scanning a decimal integer to time_t.
>>>
>>> It's not a question of whether I can or can't convert a string into an
>>> integer, rather it's a question about portability of code that uses %s
>
>> I see your p
> > > But that's just scanning a decimal integer to time_t.
> >
> > It's not a question of whether I can or can't convert a string into an
> > integer, rather it's a question about portability of code that uses %s
> I see your point but... "portability" is kind of the wrong expression
> here. If
On Jul 24 02:09, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
> > But that's just scanning a decimal integer to time_t.
>
> It's not a question of whether I can or can't convert a string into an
> integer, rather it's a question about portability of code that uses %s
I see your point but... "porta
> But that's just scanning a decimal integer to time_t.
It's not a question of whether I can or can't convert a string into an integer,
rather it's a question about portability of code that uses %s for both
functions and expects it to work unchanged in the Cygwin environment. Also,
strptime()
On 22.07.2017 13:48, Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] wrote:
Hello,
It looks like Cygwin implementation of strptime(3) cannot understand
the "%s" format (seconds since Jan 1, 1970 UTC), which strftime() can.
But that's just scanning a decimal integer to time_t.
Where implemented, how does
Hello,
It looks like Cygwin implementation of strptime(3) cannot understand the "%s"
format (seconds since Jan 1, 1970 UTC), which strftime() can.
When I test the same code of Linux, it appears to work correctly.
Cygwin:
$ gcc -Wall -o timetest timetest.c
$ ./timetest
1500755837 -> 1500755837
C
16 matches
Mail list logo
