------- Comment #20 from manu at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-15 21:49 -------
(In reply to comment #19)
> (In reply to comment #17)
> > This will be fixed yesterday if printf("%s\n", s) were equivalent to
> > puts(s) in
> > glibc.
>
> [+] The standard requires them to be equivalent? Per standard, they can't be
> equivalent if both are undefined when NULL is passed, right?
I didn't say the standard requires them to be equivalent. Per standard, two
undefined invocations of printf don't need to be equivalent.
Anyway, if you really want to believe that printf("%s\n",s) and puts(s) should
not have the same effect for defined behaviour, then we will have to agree to
disagree.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=25609
