>>> On 11.09.13 at 22:18, Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 2013-09-11 at 12:30 -0700, Kees Cook wrote: >>> The %n format is not ignored, so remove the incorrect comment about it. >> >> I think it may be better to reimplement the ignoring. > > Yeah, just had a quick look, and scanf doesn't use this code at all. > I'd much rather remove %n again instead.
Why would you want to artificially make the function diverge from the spec? People shouldn't be caught by surprises if at all possible, and one can certainly not expect people to go look at the comment before the function implementation to find out what basic (standard) features _do not_ work (one can expect so when trying to find out about _extensions_). Jan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
