> > %p = pointer
> > %Fp = far pointer? (as in segment:offset pointer in 16-bit Windows)
> Oh, right, so there most likely IS a difference between %p and %Fp, since
> %p will get shown as 0x12345678, whereas %Fp probably gets rendered as
> something like 0x1234:0x5678.
Nope. There are no far point
Uwe Bonnes wrote:
With native MSVCRT there is no difference between %Fp and %p. You can see
with the output on the MS web page about _heapwalk. And you can try
quite easily in our test suite. Maybe a 16 bit msvcrt might give different
results.
I've been away for a few days of sun in Bali :) I'll
> "Andreas" == Andreas Mohr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andreas> Hi, On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 06:23:40PM +0100, Krzysztof Foltman
Andreas> wrote:
>> Dnia 02-03-2005, ??ro o godzinie 17:34 +0100, Uwe Bonnes napisa??(a):
>> > uses a "%Fp" format spezifier. Running with native msvc
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 06:23:40PM +0100, Krzysztof Foltman wrote:
> Dnia 02-03-2005, ??ro o godzinie 17:34 +0100, Uwe Bonnes napisa??(a):
> > uses a "%Fp" format spezifier. Running with native msvcrt, this seems to be
> > the same as "%p". However builtin msvcrt stumbles about the "superfluou
>the net. And b.t.w., how do I get Google to not ignore the '%' in a search
>for "%Fp"?
You're out of luck (presently). I also had this problem and asked them
about it. Here's their answer:
---
Thank you for your note. Google currently does not recognize search terms
cont
Dnia 02-03-2005, Åro o godzinie 17:34 +0100, Uwe Bonnes napisaÅ(a):
> uses a "%Fp" format spezifier. Running with native msvcrt, this seems to be
> the same as "%p". However builtin msvcrt stumbles about the "superfluous" 'F".
%p = pointer
%Fp = far pointer? (as in segment:offset pointer in 16-bit
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 12:35:47 -0700, Jesse Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:24:27 +0100, Uwe Bonnes
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Most recent CVS...
>
> Oh, since it hits 'F' first, it will try to parse it as 'f'. Maybe
> try this to see if it no longer accepts it
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 20:24:27 +0100, Uwe Bonnes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Most recent CVS...
Oh, since it hits 'F' first, it will try to parse it as 'f'. Maybe
try this to see if it no longer accepts it as a valid specifer, and
then maybe it will parse it as a pointer.
--- wcs.c-original
> "Jesse" == Jesse Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jesse> On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:51:57 -0700, Jesse Allen
Jesse> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Right now in current CVS, our *printf will handle any strings. For
>> any type numbers (except %n), they are forwarded to libc's prin
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:51:57 -0700, Jesse Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Right now in current CVS, our *printf will handle any strings. For
> any type numbers (except %n), they are forwarded to libc's printf by
Oops, we handle %p differently too:
/* output a pointer */
else if
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 19:24:33 +0100, Andreas Mohr
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do we even have to do anything on "F"?
> "far" is long gone, right? As such simply silently ignore "F", right?
>
Right now in current CVS, our *printf will handle any strings. For
any type numbers (except %n), they a
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 05:34:23PM +0100, Uwe Bonnes wrote:
> Hallo,
>
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vccore98/HTML/_crt__heapwalk.asp
> uses a "%Fp" format spezifier. Running with native msvcrt, this seems to be
> the same as "%p". However builtin msvcrt s
Hallo,
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/vccore98/HTML/_crt__heapwalk.asp
uses a "%Fp" format spezifier. Running with native msvcrt, this seems to be
the same as "%p". However builtin msvcrt stumbles about the "superfluous" 'F".
Does anybody know what the meaning of
13 matches
Mail list logo
