Re: pkg/48318

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR pkg/48318; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: pkg/48318
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 00:43:28 +0100

 On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:35:01PM +0000, Patrick Welche wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR pkg/48318; it has been noted by GNATS.
 > 
 > From: Patrick Welche <prlw1%cam.ac.uk@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: pkg/48318
 > Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 23:30:37 +0000
 > 
 >  I was about to create an upstream bug for this, but then I saw:
 >  
 >  http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf
 >  page 309 (327th of document):
 >  
 >     "If the format is exhausted while arguments remain, the excess
 >      arguments are evaluated (as always) but are otherwise ignored."
 >  
 >  So, amazingly, that code seems to be legal. Any thoughts from the
 >  language lawyers?
 
 It's legal, but it doesn't mean it is good style. It is certainly making
 it harder for the compiler to check the correctness of the format
 string. That alone is a very good reason for avoiding the construct.
 
 Joerg