Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3CF107A3.4651AF3D@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 26 May 2002 17:04:51 +0100
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: refresh++
References:	<200205261159 DOT g4QBxVO22330 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Martin Str|mberg wrote:
[snip]
> Yes. Why (extremely strong expletive) is gcc complaining about
> perfectly legal and useful code.

It's actually trying to help us out. The warning is about the "zero-length
format string" we're passing to snprintf. It's only an error, because we're
compiling with -Werror now.
 
> The fact that libc happily changes their code to comply with broken
> gcc behaviour does not say much.
[snip]

IMHO using snprintf like this to truncate a string is overkill. Why not just
truncate it using "buf[0] = '\0';"?

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -