From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Oct 30 11:18:10 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA14421 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:18:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from hp9000.chc-chimes.com (hp9000.chc-chimes.com [206.67.97.84]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA14413 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 11:18:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from billf@chc-chimes.com) Received: from localhost by hp9000.chc-chimes.com with SMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA105871139; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:25:39 -0500 Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:25:39 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Fumerola To: Mike Smith Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: scanf in the kernel? In-Reply-To: <199810300813.AAA01726@dingo.cdrom.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 30 Oct 1998, Mike Smith wrote: > Just wondering what the general feeling would be about having scanf in > the kernel? As we move towards more abstract representations of things > (eg. device names), it's becoming more important to be able to parse > strings inside the kernel. I'm not a kernel-hacking kind of guy, but I know just from personal C experiences that scanf makes things a lot easier to change later on and easier to get a visual representation of. scanf and sprintf have become my friend. - bill fumerola [root/billf]@chc-chimes.com - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800)252.2421 x128 / bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - BF1560 - "Logic, like whiskey, loses its beneficial effect when taken in too large quantities" -Lord Dunsany To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message