On Friday 30 March 2012 16:08:36 Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On 03/30/2012 08:24 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > it's hard to say that having to add casts to arguments is an improvement. > > are those really necessary? > > Casts are necessary only when you print chars or shorts - > a rare operation. As you see, in the entire strace tree > only four tprintf calls needed tweaking. > > Strictly speaking, casts may be not necessary - IIRC, > variadic function arguments are auto-promoted to int anyway. > But I prefer to not rely on my vague recollections > of C standards - I'd use casts instead. > > It is possible to retain ability to understand %h[h]u, > but is it worth slowing down every tprintf for just four > cases where we use it?
considering we already have to handle length chars, i can't see the introduction of one more char processing being hugely detrimental. do you have data to show that this doesn't work ? the problem with rolling your own limited printf() is the lack of documentation on what is actually supported and the lack of compile time checking on what modifiers/etc... are actually respected. -mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second resolution app monitoring today. Free. http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
