Hi
I'm running on a Solaris 2.8 and %jd is not known there:
len = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%jd:%ld",
There are handful of files which contain those. Question
is: what is %j doing? Why do we need it?
-
SF.Net email i
It is also not supported on Windows as well, i had to hack and replace
%j with %lld on the fly.
I guess this is modern-Linux only vsnprintf additions.
Is it worth switching back to internal DStringPrintf? It was working fine?
Vasiljevic Zoran wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm running on a Solaris 2.8 and %jd
On Dec 6, 2007, at 5:22 PM, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
> It is also not supported on Windows as well, i had to hack and replace
> %j with %lld on the fly.
> I guess this is modern-Linux only vsnprintf additions.
>
> Is it worth switching back to internal DStringPrintf? It was working
> fine?
So far:
It matters because for example Windows just crashes if you specify
invalid specifier, for example Linux supports %T but Windows does not,
and if you specify in your c code or Tcl code %T, it will crash.
Same with %j, Windows ignores it and corrupts stack, so i had to write
wrapper around snprint
On Dec 6, 2007, at 5:41 PM, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
> Having universal
> sprintf function like it was before takes one problem away and adding
> new specifier is not that hard thqn trying to figure out portability
> issues and chasing them for hours.
I buy that, but this is pretty difficult to main
I guess this is Stephen's call
Vasiljevic Zoran wrote:
> On Dec 6, 2007, at 5:41 PM, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
>
>> Having universal
>> sprintf function like it was before takes one problem away and adding
>> new specifier is not that hard thqn trying to figure out portability
>> issues and chasing th
On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
> I guess this is Stephen's call
OK, Stephen, what should we do with this?
At the moment I removed all those from my
solaris-2.8 sandbox but this is not a real
solution. So what is the purpose of %j and
why do we need it?
-
On Dec 6, 2007 5:07 PM, Vasiljevic Zoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Dec 6, 2007, at 6:05 PM, Vlad Seryakov wrote:
>
> > I guess this is Stephen's call
>
> OK, Stephen, what should we do with this?
> At the moment I removed all those from my
> solaris-2.8 sandbox but this is not a real
> solu
