Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 02:57:07 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: Doug Hardie <bc979@lafn.org> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: vsnprintf and friends modify the va_list argument Message-ID: <20141118025707.fc183c55.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <617C3C28-2107-4D41-9E59-4C002FBDD33D@lafn.org> References: <C9A11AB7-0085-464E-A6FB-F6A3603B6372@lafn.org> <20141117030844.d83bbae3.freebsd@edvax.de> <617C3C28-2107-4D41-9E59-4C002FBDD33D@lafn.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 11:15:28 -0800, Doug Hardie wrote: > > > On 16 November 2014, at 18:08, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote: > > Maybe adding stdarg(3) to printf(3)'s SEE ALSO section would > > be a helpful choice here. > > Probably, but I would normally never chase things that far > to figure out there would be a problem. I believe a warning > like you quoted above in the printf man page would be more > likely to be noticed. This is probably a good and _possible_ idea. There aren't that many va_*-related functions in the standard library, and because the printf() family shares one manual page, such a hint could be provided here, mentioning that because of the use of the va_* functionality, certain arguments will be subject to change. This is, in my opinion, a hint that makes FreeBSD documentation more valuable again for developers. This, in combination with the reference to stdarg(3), could maybe be suggested to the FreeBSD doc team. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20141118025707.fc183c55.freebsd>