| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
| Date: | Tue, 9 Mar 2004 16:07:15 -0500 |
| Message-Id: | <200403092107.i29L7FJ6005507@envy.delorie.com> |
| From: | DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> |
| To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| In-reply-to: | <200403091926.i29JQX6i004590@envy.delorie.com> (message from DJ |
| Delorie on Tue, 9 Mar 2004 14:26:33 -0500) | |
| Subject: | Re: Broken sscanf test case |
| References: | <200403091922 DOT i29JMCqL016181 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT ltu DOT se> <200403091926 DOT i29JQX6i004590 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> |
| 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 |
> Could you run the altered test case on Linux and see what it thinks?
FYI I ran these on RHL 9. They fail both before AND after your patch:
$ ./before.x
Test 8: FAIL: ("1", "%[0123456789]%*c");
expected -1;
expected c1 '1';
expected c2 '';
got 1;
c == '1'
c2 == ''
Test 18: FAIL: ("1", "%[0123456789]%c");
expected -1;
expected c1 '1';
expected c2 '';
got 1;
c == '1'
c2 == ''
FAIL
$ ./after.x
Test 3: FAIL: ("1", "%*[0123456789]%*c");
expected 0;
expected c1 '';
expected c2 '';
got -1;
c == ''
c2 == ''
Test 13: FAIL: ("1", "%*[0123456789]%c");
expected 0;
expected c1 '';
expected c2 '';
got -1;
c == ''
c2 == ''
FAIL
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |