On Friday, 03 February 2006, at 02:30:27 (-0500),
Kris Maglione wrote:
I know that it's not portable, I just said that something needs to
be done and that that does it. I also said that it should be done
better.
I would argue that an snprintf() implementation which does not
guarantee
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 09:27:55AM -0500, Michael Jennings wrote:
Using it in in if conditional rather than a pre-processor ifdef
makes the code easier to read and makes debugging easier,
Wrong on both counts.
Both 'counts' are matters of opinion.
As for readability, I find it easier to read
These patches mainly fix the ways that things are executed. The previous
implementation was not compatible with FreeBSD in a few ways...
First, the comment in the code about needing to parse the arguments to
'entrance' rather than executing 'sh -c' was handled by prepending 'exec ' to
the
On Wednesday, 01 February 2006, at 22:05:57 (-0500),
Kris Maglione wrote:
+/* XXX:
+ * This should probably be done another way, but this way
+ * is better than leaving the chance of a non-terminated
+ * string (which has afflicted me once already) */
+#define snprintf(str, size, format,
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 11:05:28PM -0500, Michael Jennings wrote:
On Wednesday, 01 February 2006, at 22:05:57 (-0500),
Kris Maglione wrote:
+/* XXX:
+ * This should probably be done another way, but this way
+ * is better than leaving the chance of a non-terminated
+ * string (which has
