From: nobu.nokada@...
Date: 2003-04-18T18:09:38+09:00
Subject: Re: Possible bug?

Hi,

At Fri, 18 Apr 2003 16:52:21 +0900,
U.Nakamura <usa@osb.att.ne.jp> wrote:
> | > | vsnprintf() and snprintf() are used many times.  And they are
> | > | not provided by MSVCRT directly but defiend in win32/win32.h.
> | > | I'd propose to define them in win32/win32.c instead.
> | > 
> | > Is this problem only on win32 platforms?
> | > I suspect that this is not right.
> | 
> | Other platforms which don't have them use missing/vsnprintf.c
> | instead.  Win32 platforms use _vsnprintf()/_snprintf(), but
> | they are not vsnprintf()/snprintf() themselves.
> 
> (1) Some platforms have the correct (set null at the end of buffer)
>     (v)snprintf. It's OK.
> (2) Some platforms don't have (v)snprintf. Ruby uses missing/vsnprintf.c.
>     It's OK.
> (3) Win32 platforms have _(v)snprintf, and they are broken.
>     Your patch totally fix the problem, I agree.
> (4) I doubt some other platforms exist. The platforms have the wrong
>     (v)snprintf just like win32's _(v)snprintf.
> 
> If (4) is right, we should fix all (v)snprintf call at all.

You're right.  But snprintf() is used so many times, isn't it
better to make a function or a macro?

And also, err_snprintf() wrongly assumes that snprintf() never
overflow or returns truncated size.

-- 
Nobu Nakada