From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Fri Dec 16 22:57:39 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D08AC83B2D for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 22:57:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joerg@bec.de) Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (relay3-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD3E6E78 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 22:57:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joerg@bec.de) Received: from britannica.bec.de (p200300D2ABCF63104639C4FFFE599710.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:d2:abcf:6310:4639:c4ff:fe59:9710]) (Authenticated sender: joerg@bec.de) by relay3-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15BAEA80CB for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2016 23:57:35 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 23:57:34 +0100 From: Joerg Sonnenberger To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r310138 - head/lib/libc/stdio Message-ID: <20161216225734.GA16509@britannica.bec.de> References: <201612160144.uBG1ipjW016736@repo.freebsd.org> <20161216193128.wgskqt4vc44vdd7o@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <8CF1AB9C-83FE-495F-B07C-56F928282512@FreeBSD.org> <13059937.h5mayX8aKo@ralph.baldwin.cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <13059937.h5mayX8aKo@ralph.baldwin.cx> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 22:57:39 -0000 On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 02:45:19PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote: > In general I agree with something like this instead, but it is quite a bit more > tedious to use as you have to run it once to determine the length, allocate a > buffer, and then run it again. Why do you need to determine the length? It's not like people write novells in the kernel to describe bit fields. A reasonable sized stack buffer covers pretty much all the interesting cases. Joerg