From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Oct 31 11:47:23 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA06825 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 11:47:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ibm.net. (slip166-72-224-172.pa.us.ibm.net [166.72.224.172]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA06794 for ; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 11:47:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from placej@ibm.net) Received: (from placej@localhost) by ibm.net. (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA00313; Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:46:55 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from placej) Message-ID: <19981031144649.A278@ka3tis.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 1998 14:46:49 -0500 From: "John C. Place" To: hackers@freebsd.com Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: scanf in the kernel? Reply-To: "John C. Place" Mail-Followup-To: hackers@freebsd.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG References: <199810300813.AAA01726@dingo.cdrom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.91.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Bill Fumerola on Fri, Oct 30, 1998 at 10:25:39AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, Oct 30, 1998 at 10:25:39AM -0500, Bill Fumerola wrote: > 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. > I am not one either but I thought the *printf commands are very expensive (to the processer) and something as low level as the kernel would one try to avoid these??? John To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message