From owner-cvs-lib  Wed Dec 24 06:36:42 1997
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-lib>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id GAA11112
          for cvs-lib-outgoing; Wed, 24 Dec 1997 06:36:42 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-cvs-lib)
Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id GAA11087;
          Wed, 24 Dec 1997 06:36:24 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from ache@FreeBSD.org)
From: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from ache@localhost)
	by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.6/8.8.5) id GAA19823;
	Wed, 24 Dec 1997 06:32:42 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 1997 06:32:42 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199712241432.GAA19823@freefall.freebsd.org>
To: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-lib@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/stdio snprintf.c vsnprintf.c
Sender: owner-cvs-lib@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

ache        1997/12/24 06:32:41 PST

  Modified files:
    lib/libc/stdio       snprintf.c vsnprintf.c 
  Log:
  Back out part related to "return 0 if n == 0" and return EOF as before.
  
  The main argument is that it is impossible to determine if %n evaluated or not
  when snprintf return 0, because it can happens for both n == 0 and n == 1.
  Although EOF here is good indication of the end of process, if n is
  decreased in the loop...
  Since it is already supposed in many places that EOF *is* negative, f.e.
  from Single Unix specs for snprintf
  "return ... a negative value if an output error was encountered"
  this not makes situation worse.
  
  Revision  Changes    Path
  1.7       +1 -3      src/lib/libc/stdio/snprintf.c
  1.7       +1 -3      src/lib/libc/stdio/vsnprintf.c