Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1999/06/14/14:17:55
Bonjour M. Nate Eldredge
>
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Jun 1999, Alain Magloire wrote:
> >
> > > int
> > > snprintf(char *str, size_t n, const char *fmt, ...)
> > > {
> > > FILE _strbuf;
> > > int len;
> > >
> > > if ((int)n < 1)
> > > return EOF;
> >
> > The C9X draft is rather vague on this point, but it surely doesn't say
> > that N should be strictly positive. In fact, I can understand its
> > language as meaning that calling {v,}snprintf with a zero N is a way
> > to know how many characters should I allocate for the string that I
> > pass to it when I *really* need some output.
> >
> > What do other implementations do when N is zero?
>
> glibc does as you expected: it returns the number of characters without
> touching the buffer. (You can even pass NULL.)
No suprise, GLibC has a fairly fast dev rate.
>
> I think the cast to signed int is bogus too. Passing -1 as n appears to
> make it write unlimited (or rather 0xffffffff) characters. IMHO,
> there's no reason to think about the sign of a size_t. Granted, we
> don't support 2GB arrays now, but I think the principle of "caveat user"
> applies.
Fair enough, but the FILE struct member field, _cnt, is an int.
there seem to be some places where the stdio code do (fp->_cnt < 0)
--
au revoir, alain
----
Aussi haut que l'on soit assis, on est toujours assis que sur son cul !!!
- Raw text -