Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-09-01 Thread Jim Meyering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) wrote: > Hi again, > > Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> +/* Just like strftime, but with two more arguments: >> + POSIX requires that strftime use the local timezone information. >> + When __UTC is nonzero and tm->tm_zone is NULL or the empty str

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-31 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi again, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > +/* Just like strftime, but with two more arguments: > + POSIX requires that strftime use the local timezone information. > + When __UTC is nonzero and tm->tm_zone is NULL or the empty string, > + use UTC instead. Use __NS as the number

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-31 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Here's some long-overdue documentation: > > From 4bb481aef2793a2cd25d61113d58da42af2bf8a8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Jim Meyering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2008 17:34:24 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] * lib/strftime.h: Add comments desc

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-31 Thread Jim Meyering
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> I'm trying to fix a portability bug related to `strftime(3)' [0]. The >> `strftime' module doesn't provide `strftime ()' as one would expect but >> instead provides `nstrftime ()', with additional argumen

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-30 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > I'm trying to fix a portability bug related to `strftime(3)' [0]. The > `strftime' module doesn't provide `strftime ()' as one would expect but > instead provides `nstrftime ()', with additional arguments: > int ut, int ns. What are these argume

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-26 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Bruno, Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> In addition, it doesn't mention any portability problem, but AIX and >> Solaris (at least) have a non-C99-compliant behavior (let alone GNU >> extensions): https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?24130 . > > Can you ex

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-26 Thread Simon Josefsson
Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> That doesn't make much sense to me. IMHO, the 'strftime' module should >> provide a 'strftime' function. > > Jim Meyering wrote: >> nstrftime is not in glibc. >> It's been in use (at least in coreutils) since GNU date started >>

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Simon Josefsson wrote: > That doesn't make much sense to me. IMHO, the 'strftime' module should > provide a 'strftime' function. Jim Meyering wrote: > nstrftime is not in glibc. > It's been in use (at least in coreutils) since GNU date started > supporting the %N format in 2002. To make things s

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-26 Thread Bruno Haible
Ludovic Courtès wrote: > In addition, it doesn't mention any portability problem, but AIX and > Solaris (at least) have a non-C99-compliant behavior (let alone GNU > extensions): https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/index.php?24130 . Can you explain what the portability problem is, preferably with a test

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-25 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi, Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> I'm trying to fix a portability bug related to `strftime(3)' [0]. The >> `strftime' module doesn't provide `strftime ()' as one would expect > > And the gnulib doc is incorrect. Fixing it: In addition, it doesn't mention a

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-25 Thread Ludovic Courtès
Hi Simon, Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > That doesn't make much sense to me. IMHO, the 'strftime' module should > provide a 'strftime' function. Agreed. IIUC, this could be achieved by compiling the file twice: once with "#define my_strftime" and once without. > Where is 'nstrf

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-25 Thread Jim Meyering
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > >> The `strftime' module doesn't provide `strftime ()' as one would >> expect but instead provides `nstrftime ()' > > That doesn't make much sense to me. IMHO, the 'strftime' module should > provide a 'strft

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-25 Thread Bruno Haible
Ludovic Courtès wrote: > I'm trying to fix a portability bug related to `strftime(3)' [0]. The > `strftime' module doesn't provide `strftime ()' as one would expect And the gnulib doc is incorrect. Fixing it: 2008-08-25 Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * doc/posix-functions/strftime.

Re: `nstrftime ()' prototype

2008-08-25 Thread Simon Josefsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > The `strftime' module doesn't provide `strftime ()' as one would > expect but instead provides `nstrftime ()' That doesn't make much sense to me. IMHO, the 'strftime' module should provide a 'strftime' function. Where is 'nstrftime' defined as a GNU