Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 02:37:02 -0800 From: ithilgore <ithilgore.fbsd@gmail.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: question about change in inet_ntoa.c Message-ID: <47BFF74E.4010608@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <47BFF17B.5080205@gmail.com> References: <47BFF17B.5080205@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
ithilgore wrote:
>
> I was looking at the differences between some old FreeBSD code
> and the one of 7.0-RC1 and was wondering about a change
> in inet_ntoa.c
>
> /***** 7.0-RC1 **************/
>
> sprintf(buf, "%d.%d.%d.%d",
> ucp[0] & 0xff,
> ucp[1] & 0xff,
> ucp[2] & 0xff,
> ucp[3] & 0xff);
>
>
> /****** 4.11-RELEASE ***********/
>
>
> static const char fmt[] = "%u.%u.%u%u";
> if ((size_t)snprintf(dst, size, fmt, src[0], src[1], src[2], src[3])
> >= size) {
> ....
> ....
>
> Was there a specific purpose of changing the more easy and simple way
> of %u instead of the combination of %d and and-ing with 0xff ??
> It essentially gives the same result but increases overhead (i think)
> in the more
> recent version.
>
>
I just noticed I made a mistake. The second code is libc's version of
inet_ntoa.
But the question still counts. Why not use the plain simpler version of
libc ?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47BFF74E.4010608>