[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: working with "good enough" functions
From: |
Mike Frysinger |
Subject: |
Re: working with "good enough" functions |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Jan 2009 00:30:53 -0500 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.10.3 (Linux/2.6.28; KDE/4.1.3; x86_64; ; ) |
On Saturday 17 January 2009 15:34:39 Bruno Haible wrote:
> Mike Frysinger and Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > >> If this happens often enough, perhaps gnulib should have a
> > >> printf-posix-no-fp module that does what you want?
> > >
> > > i would certainly use it, but if i'm the only one expressing interest
> > > thus far, then maybe it isnt a hot issue.
> >
> > I see that some *printf objects from gnulib are linked into builds even
> > on glibc platforms. If that would be fixed by using a module
> > printf-posix-no-fp, I would use it. (My projects rarely use
> > float/double.)
>
> But "rarely" does not mean "never". The point of the gnulib substitutes is
> that you can use %zd, %f, etc. in your format strings and don't need to
> worry about platforms or compatibility.
>
> If someone is to introduce yet another variant *iprintf for format strings
> that contain only integer/pointer/character/string directives and no
> floating-point directives, then it reduces the reliability of your program:
> If you happen to use %f in such a place nevertheless, the compiler will not
> be able to warn you. (GCC supports an attribute __printf__ but none for
> __iprintf__.)
gnulib isnt there to protect the developer from doing something wrong. it's
there to provide a sane (according to the needs of the developer) environment.
> I would let things lie as they are: Nowadays, executable size is not
> critical any more.
tell that to the embedded developer
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- working with "good enough" functions, Mike Frysinger, 2009/01/04
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Jim Meyering, 2009/01/04
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Paolo Bonzini, 2009/01/05
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Mike Frysinger, 2009/01/05
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Paul Eggert, 2009/01/08
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Eric Blake, 2009/01/08
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Mike Frysinger, 2009/01/08
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Simon Josefsson, 2009/01/08
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Mike Frysinger, 2009/01/08
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Bruno Haible, 2009/01/17
- Re: working with "good enough" functions,
Mike Frysinger <=
- Re: working with "good enough" functions, Simon Josefsson, 2009/01/18