> alternatively we could encode "%t" as "%.s". this is an apparently
> non-sensical construct (print zero characters of the string) that we could
> overload with this meaning.

I prefer that; doing a lot of xml_quote everywhere is hassle.  gcc will
not complain about "%.s" ?

At the end of this it would be good to put in a comment somewhere, a 
short description of the nonstandard format extensions we now support.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
Valgrind-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/valgrind-developers

Reply via email to