On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 12:57:47PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > * Masanori Ogino <masanori.og...@gmail.com> [2016-04-07 16:12:39 +0900]: > > 2016-04-07 15:26 GMT+09:00 Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org>: > > > I'm not sure what the %Id thing you're referring to is; can you point > > > me to a description of it? > > > > %Id is essentially an extension of printf(3) in glibc 2.2 and later. > > It can be implemented by the same way as how sysdep is implemented; it > > just depends on the current locale, not the ABI. > > > > Search http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man3/sprintf.3.html by "glibc > > 2.2 adds" for details. > > i think it is not acceptable that glibc introduces > extensions that can collide with future versions of > the c and posix standards. > > but it is even worse if a translation file format > depends on such extensions which makes it hard to > fix the problem once the collision happens > (like it happened with scanf %a). > > there are other problems with this flag, so gettext > manual should recommend some other solution.
In that case this has nothing to do with gettext capabilities; gettext does not process format strings but simply translates one format strign to another, and if a program is using non-portable format strings, it's going to break whether it's using gettext or not. So I don't think it's relevant to this discussion of whether _gettext_ is compatible. Rich
