Message-Id:	<200011132140.QAA10421@qnx.com>
Subject:	Re: Summary of the snprintf() situation
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Mon, 13 Nov 2000 16:40:41 -0500 (EST)
From:	"Alain Magloire" <alain AT qnx DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<14ED3AD53387@HRZ1.hrz.tu-darmstadt.de> from "Juan Manuel Guerrero" at Nov 13, 2000 09:59:47 PM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL0b1]
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> 
> Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 20:14:00 +0000
> From: Richard Dawe <richdawe AT bigfoot DOT com>
> 
> [snip]
> > I guess that they are under a BSD-style licence? I don't think they could
> > be incorporated into DJGPP for this reason.
> [snip]
> It seems that the message has generated more confusion than enlightment.
> Please note that it was **never** my intention to suggest this code for DJGPP inclusion.
> 
> > >This is an example of what a package may expect that snprintf() and
> > >vsnprintf() definitions looks like.
> >
> > Thanks, they have the same prototypes as Alain's implementation.
> [snip]
> That is the important thing.
> The goal was to call your attention to this package with its own definitions
> of {v},snprintf() functions.
> 
> Once again, it was *never* my intention to suggest to drop Alain's implementation and
> to start using this code. The patch should only show what this particular package expects.

Maybe I should clarify some points too ;-)

Hmm, it's not __my__ implementation.  Eli worked on this, actually if it has
to be someone's implementation, I would suggest Rich, he did more of the
sweating and the brain overheating.

Ok 'nough said.

Later,

-- 
au revoir, alain
----
Aussi haut que l'on soit assis, on n'est toujours assis que sur son cul !!!

- Raw text -