| msg50094 - (view) |
Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) *  |
Date: 2006-04-23 06:18 |
| The patch modifies configure.in to add PY_FORMAT_SIZE_T to configure.in (meaning you need to run autoheader on configure.in) so that if %zd is supported for size_t it sets PY_FORMAT_SIZE_T to "z", otherwise it goes undefined and the preprocessor trickery in Include/pyport.h kicks in. This fix removes compiler warnings on OS X 10.4.6 with gcc 4.0.1 thanks to PY_FORMAT_SIZE_T being set to "". Initially assigned to Martin v. Loewis since he said this would be good to do and the Py_ssize_t stuff is his invention. |
|
|
| msg50095 - (view) |
Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2006-04-26 16:15 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=21627 The patch seems to rely on printf returning <0 for the unrecognized format. That seems unreliable: atleast on Linux, printf just outputs the format as-is for unrecognized formats. Instead, I think it should use sprintf, and then check whether the result is the string "0" (in addition to checking whether the printf call itself failed). |
|
|
| msg50096 - (view) |
Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) * |
Date: 2006-04-27 04:59 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=357491 OK, uploaded a new version that uses strchr to check for '%', 'z', and 'd'. If it looks reasonable I will apply it and hope I don't break the buildbot. =) |
|
|
| msg50097 - (view) |
Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) * |
Date: 2006-04-27 05:16 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=357491 Realized there is a better way: just strncmp() for the expected result. Uploaded a new version. |
|
|
| msg50098 - (view) |
Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2006-04-27 05:29 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=21627 Looks fine to me, although it has "unusual" style of C: - sizeof(char) is guaranteed to be 1 by the C standard. The C standard defines "char" and "byte" as synonyms, even if that means that "byte" has more than 8 bits. sizeof gives the number of bytes, so for char, it is always 1. - for a fixed-size array, people would normally make this an automatic (stack) variable, instead of bothering with explicit memory allocation, i.e. char str_buffer[4] Just out of fear of buffer overruns, many people would also add some horrendous overallocation, such as str_buffer[1024] :-) |
|
|
| msg50099 - (view) |
Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) * |
Date: 2006-04-28 04:51 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=357491 Yeah, I tried to use a string constant as a stack value, but that didn't work. =) My brain just was not thinking in C when I first came up with the patch. I have a new version that uses a char array as the buffer. I am on vacation so I don't have the time to apply it and break buildbot, so I will hold off on applying if no one finds problems with this version. |
|
|
| msg50100 - (view) |
Author: Brett Cannon (brett.cannon) * |
Date: 2006-05-11 05:15 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=357491 Applied in r45960 . |
|
|