> From: Paul Smith <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected], [email protected] > Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2022 09:23:41 -0400 > > As best as I recall, the non-standard part of the old snprintf() was > that it returned -1 if the buffer wasn't large enough, rather than the > number of chars that would be needed. > > The change made here doesn't rely on that behaviour. > > However I realize now that I need to forcibly add a nul terminator > because the old snprintf() on Windows didn't nul-terminate the string > if the buffer wasn't large enough. > > Maybe I'll just punt on that and simply allocate a large-enough buffer. > > Were there other differences in old snprintf()?
The above two, plus the fact that it doesn't support the newer format specifiers, like %z etc.
