Closed Bug 64666 Opened 19 years ago Closed 19 years ago

In prlog.c, assumptions about sscanf are not true for all compilers

Categories

(NSPR :: NSPR, defect, P3)

4.0.2
defect

Tracking

(Not tracked)

VERIFIED FIXED

People

(Reporter: mkaply, Assigned: wtc)

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

We actually spoke to our compiler vendor about this.

According to them, sscanf with [A-Z] or [a-z] or [0-9] to specify ranges is not 
part of any spec.

It is just something that some compiler vendors invented as a short cut.

I looked at K&R and they make no mention that this is legal.

Anyway, the proper syntax (although ugly) is to spell it out.

I'll attach a diff
You are right.  I verified this is true.

I checked in your patch on the tip and NSPRPUB_CLIENT_BRANCH.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Priority: -- → P3
Target Milestone: --- → 4.1.1
Version: 3.0 → 4.0.2
Can we close this?

I believe the fix is checked in everywhere.
Fix is checked in
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Verify fixed
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Set target milestone NSPR 4.2.  This fix was not checked in
on the NSPRPUB_RELEASE_4_1_BRANCH.
Target Milestone: 4.1.1 → 4.2
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.