Re: [HACKERS] snprintf causes regression

[email protected] wrote:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> [email protected] writes:
> >> >>> Please see my posting about using a macro for snprintf.
> >>
> >> > Wasn't the issue about odd behavior of the Win32 linker choosing the
> >> wrong
> >> > vnsprintf?
> >>
> >> You're right, the point about the macro was to avoid linker weirdness on
> >> Windows.  We need to do that part in any case.  I think Bruce confused
> >> that issue with the one about whether our version supported %n$
> >> adequately ... which it doesn't just yet ...
> >
> > Perhaps I am reading old email in this reply but I thought I should
> > clarify:
> >
> > Once we do:
> >
> > 	#define vsnprintf(...)        pg_vsnprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
> > 	#define snprintf(...)         pg_snprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
> > 	#define printf(...)           pg_printf(__VA_ARGS__)
> 
> 
> I'm not sure that macros can have variable number of arguments on all
> supported platforms. I've been burnt by this before.

The actual patch is:
	
	+ #ifdef __GNUC__
	+ #define vsnprintf(...)        pg_vsnprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
	+ #define snprintf(...) pg_snprintf(__VA_ARGS__)
	+ #define printf(...)           pg_printf(__VA_ARGS__)
	+ #else
	+ #define vsnprintf             pg_vsnprintf
	+ #define snprintf              pg_snprintf
	+ #define printf                pg_printf
	+ #endif

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  [email protected]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
    (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [email protected])