[PATCH 1/6 v2] Add X*asprintf() routines to mirror common asprintf() routines
keithp at keithp.com
Wed Dec 1 10:42:56 PST 2010
On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 21:53:26 -0800, Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith at oracle.com> wrote:
> Provides a portable implementation of this common allocating sprintf()
> API found in many, but not yet all, of the platforms we support.
> If the platform provides vasprintf() we simply wrap it, otherwise we
> implement it - either way callers can use it regardless of platform.
I didn't see any closure to my question as to whether we should just be
exporting these as 'asprintf' et al., instead of creating a new name.
Do we trust autoconf enough to expect to be able to correctly detect the
presence of a 'real' asprintf so that our replacement only be used on
systems not having one? If so, perhaps just using the standard name
would make the code easier to maintain? Or not?
keith.packard at intel.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the xorg-devel