Re: snprintf heads-up

ZS>> written. As it doesn't always appear to be the case, the best approach More precisely, it almost always is not the case, once the 'n' part comes into play. ZS>> IMHO would be using the bundled snprintf() always, regardless of whether ZS>> snprintf() is available on the platform. ZS>> As far as I can tell from glancing through snprintf.c, this version of ZS>> snprintf() would return the number of characters that were effectively ZS>> written under all circumstances (I could be wrong, we need to test it). That would be highly confusing behaviour - calling something snprintf where it isn't snprintf. Then we better call it safe_snprintf or something like that. -- Stanislav Malyshev stas@zend.com http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.106