On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 12:49:46PM -0700, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> 
> On Jun 21, 2005, at 3:14 AM, Greywolf wrote:
> 
> >With regard to "(null)" vs. "Bus error (Core dumped).", that  
> >doesn't matter
> >to me, other than being a potential nicety.  What matters to me is the
> >compiler is pretending it knows what I want, even though I am not  
> >asking
> >for it.  It's like walking into a shop and asking for a ham and  
> >jack sandwich
> >and getting mortadella and mozzarella.  Sure, it might be "better",  
> >but
> >it's not what I expected, much less what I asked for.
> 
> When you called printf() (or puts(), for that matter), you have, by  
> definition, asked for the standards-described effect.

So no implementation is ever allowed to extend any standards defined function?

> 
> If you want to depend on extensions, then you should call an API that  
> explicitly provides them, period!

I see. So there's either "completely standards conforming" calls or "other".

i.e. we should now have printfEx for anything printf related the standard
didn't cover...

James