Date:	Fri, 08 Aug 2003 10:36:37 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<1659-Fri08Aug2003103637+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to:	<200308080701.JAA17576@lws256.lu.erisoft.se> (message from Martin
	Stromberg on Fri, 8 Aug 2003 09:01:31 +0200 (MET DST))
Subject:	Re: (fwd) Re: sscanf's return value
References:	<200308080701 DOT JAA17576 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
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

> From: Martin Stromberg <eplmst AT epl DOT ericsson DOT se>
> Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 09:01:31 +0200 (MET DST)
> > 
> > OTOH, DJGPP will output 0 even if the input string is "" in the code
> > quoted above.  So, DJGPP's sscanf is broken, too, just in a different
> > way :-)
> 
> The second return value they are talking about is when the code is 
> changed to
> 
>     #include <stdio.h>
> 
>     int main()
>     {
>         char buff[4];
>         int rc = sscanf("123", "%[0123456789]%*c", buff);
>         printf("%d\n", rc);
>         return 0;
>     }

Thanks for this, but I still don't understand why returning a 0 when
the string is "" is a bug.  Can you explain?

- Raw text -