X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3FAE4A3B.48713A03@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Sun, 09 Nov 2003 14:07:55 +0000
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: (fwd) Re: sscanf's return value
References:	<200308291742 DOT h7THgvTw005443 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Martin Str|mberg wrote:
> I posted the following and still no comment. I think they agree
> (silence is golden). The previous articles made their option
> clear. Anyone not thinking so, please follow-up the article or one of
> its siblings in the newsgroup. Hence we do have a bug in *scanf(). (No
> I'm not volunteering to correct it.)

After reading the C99 standard, I agree with what you wrote below.

I'm going to use the examples as a new set of test cases.

I'm trying to fix our sscanf.

[snip]
> Let's see if I got this now.
> 
> ``sscanf("", "%*[0123456789]%*c");'' should return EOF (input
> failure).
> 
> ``sscanf("X", "%*[0123456789]%*c");'' should return 0 as there's not
> an input failure but a matching failure.
> 
> ``sscanf("1", "%*[0123456789]%*c");'' should return EOF as there's a
> input failure after matching ``1''.
> 
> ``sscanf("1X2", "%*[0123456789]%*[0123456789]"'' should return 0 as
> there's a matching failure after matching ``1''.
[snip]

Bye, Rich =]

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

"You can't evaluate a man by logic alone." -- McCoy, "I, Mudd", Star Trek

- Raw text -