On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 11:00:42AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Yeah. As a separate matter, it might be useful to revise stringinfo.c > and the asprintf code so that *if* the returned value is larger than the > given buffer size, we use it as a guide to resizing, avoiding the possible > need to loop multiple times to make the buffer large enough. And we could > also improve our own implementation of snprintf to follow the C99 spec. > > The point here is that we still need to cope with pre-C99 implementations > that might return -1 or the given buffer size on overflow. The NetBSD > implementation doesn't do that, which is reasonable in their context, but > not workable for us.
I would vote for choosing the standard we want vsnprintf() to follow (probably C99) and substituting a conforming implementation wherever "configure" detects that libc does not conform. We'll be shipping some replacement vsnprintf() in any case; we may as well use it to insulate the rest of our code from less-preferred variants. -- Noah Misch EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
