Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 Apollo 1/28/85; site apollo.uucp Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mhuxn!mhuxb!mhuxr!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!wanginst!apollo!rees From: rees@apollo.uucp (Jim Rees) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: 4.2 sprintf too painful? Message-ID: <2497ee9f.1de6@apollo.uucp> Date: Tue, 5-Feb-85 12:32:02 EST Article-I.D.: apollo.2497ee9f.1de6 Posted: Tue Feb 5 12:32:02 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 8-Feb-85 01:45:34 EST References: <247441a5.1de6@apollo.uucp> Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, Mass. Lines: 21 I've gotten several answers to my question about this cryptic remark in the Vax 4.2 /usr/include/stdio.h. Lots of people asked me about it, so I'll just post the answer once. - Jim Rees #ifdef vax char *sprintf(); /* too painful to do right */ #endif From: sun!shannon (Bill Shannon) Date: mon, 4 feb 85 03:05:24 Subject: Re: 4.2 sprintf too painful? Bill Joy put that in at Sun. "Too painful" means too painful to hunt down and fix all the unsupported programs at Berkeley that depend on Berkeley's non-standard sprintf return value. At Sun sprintf was recently changed to be compatible with System V. The lesson to be learned is, don't depend on the return value of sprintf. Bill Shannon Sun Microsystems, Inc.