Subject: Re: bin/8880: Output from pac not always formatted correctly.
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Giles Lean <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/03/1999 08:23:48
On Sat, 27 Nov 1999 12:39:23 +0100 Jaromir Dolecek wrote:
> seems like ANSI C and POSIX doesn't aggree on usage of "width" for
> %s type for printf(3).
> Am I seriously confused or the POSIX and ANSI C really don't treat
> this the same way ? If so, it's rather unfortunate ...
Since POSIX references the C standard for this, there isn't an
inconsistency. I can't tell if you're confused or not. :-)
[From the O'Reilly POSIX Programmer's Guide]
> Description Meaning of width Meaning of precision
> s Argument is assumed to be Specifies the maximum UNDEFINED
> char *. Characters up to (but number of characters
> not including) a terminating to be written.
> null are written.
Answer: the book is wrong. The width is the minimum width of the
field. The precision is the maximum number of characters to use from
In preference to this book, I recommend using the "Single Unix
Standard" which is freely accessible at http://www.opengroup.org.
(This isn't the only error I have found in the O'Reilly POSIX book,
but since I haven't used it much (I now have the real standards) I
don't really know if I've found the only errors, or if it is just
inaccurate. Maybe there is an errata page at www.oreilly.com?)