Re: cb/pedantic-build-for-developers, POSIX-but-not-C99 and -Wno-pedantic-ms-format

Am 21.09.21 um 12:10 schrieb Carlo Arenas:

quoted

    -       strbuf_addf(&fmt, "%%s%%s%%s-%%0%1$lud.%%0%1$lud-%%s-%%s-%%s",
    -                   (unsigned long)tmp.len);
    +       strbuf_addf(&fmt, "%%s%%s%%s-%%0%lud.%%0%lud-%%s-%%s-%%s",
    +                   (unsigned long)tmp.len, (unsigned long)tmp.len);

The C standard version seems simpler to me, so I would say this was a
good outcome overall.

I get hypnotized by all those percent signs. %-O

quoted

I may be wrong, but I believe that construct is widely portable, we
don't use it in the main source, but in the po/ files (so anything that
uses git + gettext tests for this already):

    git grep -P '%\d+\$' -- po

I wasn't aware of that extension.  Seems useful for translations, when
reordering elements is required or convenient to match the sentence
structure of a different language.

The lack of warnings about the use of that extension in po/ means
translated formats are not checked by the compiler at all, right?
According to the gettext documentation [2] msgfmt takes care of that
when building the translation files, though.

It is not part of ANY C standard, so it will just print gibberish in
systems that don't carry this extension.

FWIW is not supported in Windows, which probably explains why they
don't carry the po files.

Right, Microsoft doesn't mention it in its printf format documentation
[1].  The gettext documentation [3] claims that such platforms get
replacement functions automatically via libintl.h.

René


[1] https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/cpp/c-runtime-library/format-specification-syntax-printf-and-wprintf-functions?view=msvc-160
[2] https://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/gettext.html#c_002dformat-Flag
[3| https://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/gettext.html#c_002dformat