Closed Bug 64666 Opened 19 years ago Closed 19 years ago
.c, assumptions about sscanf are not true for all compilers
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
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
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.