On 7/15/15 8:02 AM, Xin Li wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 07/14/15 15:17, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 13:44 -0700, Xin Li wrote:
On 07/14/15 13:29, Garrett Cooper wrote:
On Jul 14, 2015, at 12:16, Baptiste Daroussin
<b...@freebsd.org> wrote:
Author: bapt Date: Tue Jul 14 19:16:14 2015 New Revision:
285552 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/285552
Log: Convert atoi(3) to stronum(3) which allows to arguments
and report proper errors to the users
Is strtonum preferred over strtoll, etc?
strtonum(3) is a wrapper of strtoll() and provides more
functionality like range checking, so I think the answer would be
yes.
Cheers,
Except if we convert all our tools that take numbers on the command
line to use strtonum() then peoples' existing scripts and other
automation that passes 0xWhatever numbers suddenly stop working.
strtonum() seems to be about 2/3 of a good idea.
I think the caller has to be calling with 0 or 16 as base to request
that behavior? If we are converting from atoi, the base number is a
fixed value of 10.
My only concern with strtonum() is that it's English only.
does it cover 0100 and 0x100?
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
