Rob Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 19:55, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> Actually, something does depend on it: it is used to implement
>> _vsnwprintf in ntdll, so you can't change it.
>
> How about this updated patch then?
No, vsnprintfW is used directly in ntdll.spec
Uwe Bonnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Doesn't it sound like it's wrong for ntdll _vsnwprintf() to rely on a
> restricted implementation for snprintfW()?
No, since we provide snprintfW ourselves we can decide how it should
behave. We could of course have two different implementations but that
d
> "Alexandre" == Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Alexandre> Rob Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> At present, if the size of the buffer passed to snprintfW is too
>> small then the function returns -1, as opposed to the required size
>> of the buffer (as pe
Rob Shearman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At present, if the size of the buffer passed to snprintfW is too small
> then the function returns -1, as opposed to the required size of the
> buffer (as per C snprintf). This greatly limits its usefulness and can
> give incorrect results for those using
