Fredrik Lundh wrote: > > I wrote: > > > not quite ready to be checked in, but good enough to take > > on a test drive: > > > > http://sourceforge.net/patch/?func=detailpatch&patch_id=100895&group_id=5470 > > anyone looked at this? > > should I check it in, and see what happens? The patch needs some docs which go into api.tex. Right now, all formatting codes supported by printf() are allowed. Your patch changes this into a useful, but far more limited set of codes. In the end, I would prefer the solution I mentioned a few days ago: add checks to configure which determine the availability of snprintf() and then put a macro def into pyport.h which either uses snprintf() (if available) or simply drops the length argument and sticks with sprintf(). Since snprintf() will become a standard anyway, why try to emulate its behaviour ? -- Marc-Andre Lemburg ______________________________________________________________________ Business: http://www.lemburg.com/ Python Pages: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4