On Jan 18, 2008, at 1:44 PM, Martin Peach wrote:
Miller Puckette wrote:
To: Patrice Colet pat@mamalala.org CC: pd-dev@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] snprintf vs. sprintf_s? Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:51:04 -0800
Hmm, so perhaps I really should be using MSW and not _MSC_VER in the code. As it is now, cygwin will encounter unaliased snprinf() calls, which might not compile if sprintf_s is provided there instead.
Cygwin gcc compiles snprintf() without errors here. I think sprintf_s is unique to Microsoft.
Yeah, cygwin is a complete POSIX layer for Windows, so it provides snprintf(). And the MinGW runtime has provided a sane snprintf(). _MSC_VER is the best bet for sprintf_s, keep the MS weirdness in MS land.
.hc
Martin
M
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 06:02:42PM +0100, Patrice Colet wrote:
Hi Miller,
Miller Puckette a ?crit :
Hi Devs,
I found out that .Net apparently doesn't use "snprintf" but has a
similar
function named "sprintf_s". (A couple of recent patches change
"sprintfs"
to "snprintfs" leading to compile errors in .Net). I'm thinking of
just
putting the following in s_main.c and s_file.c:
#ifdef MSW #define snprinf sprintf_s #endif
My question: will this break cygwin or some other non-microsoft
compiler
for Windows?
thanks Miller
this doesn't break compilation on cygwin shell (with -mno-cygwin flag)
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
PD-dev mailing list PD-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----
News is what people want to keep hidden and everything else is publicity. - Bill Moyers