[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Geng) wrote: > On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 05:35:43PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Geng) wrote: >> ... >> > file you extracted above is from the wc command. You can watch the genparse >> > generated parser for it from >> > http://genparse.sourceforge.net/examples/wc_clp.c. >> >> It's nice to see the continuing improvements. >> >> I noticed that you transformed the uses of fputs in wc's usage >> function into uses of fprintf in your generated wc_clp.c. >> That is probably ok in most cases, but in some (with a string >> containing "%"), it's not -- unless you escape them. >> Besides, I switched from fprintf to fputs for a reason: so that >> I (and translators) don't have to worry about such escaping. >> In addition, I don't mind that fputs is lighter-weight than fprintf. > > Is there a special reason why you use fprintf (... , stdout) and > fputs (stdout, ...) instead of printf and puts?
Not that I recall. For your purposes in that context, I think the latter are better -- less syntax. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list Bug-coreutils@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
