Hi Paul,
Eric Blake wrote:
> one _very_ common use of snprintf is to call it with size 0 to see
> how much to allocate, then allocate and call again.
Among all the
portability problems fixed by snprintf-posix, the return value for size
0 buffer makes the most sense to me to promote to plain snprintf.
Paul Eggert wrote:
> GNU code shouldn't have arbitrary limits like that.
> ...
> I checked today, and coreutils proper uses snprintf in three places:
> once with (NULL, 0, ...), and twice with a fixed buffer as in the
> above example. The latter two uses are buggy.
OK, if you agree that a correct return value from snprintf() should be
part of the 'snprintf' module, I won't further object.
But I would find it good if
- you would modify m4/vsnprintf.m4 like m4/snprintf.m4 - otherwise the
gnulib modules 'vsnprintf' and 'snprintf' are inconsistent.
- the files doc/posix-functions/{snprintf,vsnprintf}.texi were be
updated to match the code.
- the test suite would be updated accordingly, i.e. the tests for the
correct return value were moved from tests/test-snprintf-posix.h to
tests/test-snprintf.c and tests/test-vsnprintf.c.
Bruno
