Hi Rich, On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 09:04:51AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > > n?:1 is a GNU extension: > > > > > > warning: ISO C forbids omitting the middle term of a ‘?:’ expression > > > [-Wpedantic] > > > > > > with gcc -pedantic -std=c23, and such code should not be given in > > > examples (as a workaround should still be valid for portable code). > > > > Hmmm, I guess I can write it as n?n:1. > > > > I'll write a proposal to standardize ?: in ISO C too. > > That still doesn't make it appropriate to recommend in a man page for > people who will be writing code mostly to non bleeding edge (some even > C89) versions of the standard. > > Examples and proscriptions should be minimally fancy, not using new or > clever things unnecessarily in ways that could break or just not > immediately be understood by the reader.
Yep, I meant that as a side note to address the fact that this is non- standard. I've changed this patch to use n?n:1 as said above. Have a lovely day! Alex > > Rich > -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
