> Otherwise looks good, but strncat is C99, and we support targets which
> don't have a C99 libc (been there, done that..). Since in this case
> you're dealing with string literals rather than user input, it ought
> to be safe to just use plain strcat (or strlen+memcpy, if you prefer).
Nope, strnc
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 10:54 AM, FX wrote:
> The attached patch fixes PR 62296
> (https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62296). The Fortran
> interpretation there was a bit confused (see links to comp.lang.fortran
> thread from the PR), but the consensus is that the standard makes a
>
10-day *ping* for my 3 Fortran patches:
- Handle invalid command line in EXECUTE_COMMAND_LINE
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00758.html)
- Use libbacktrace in libgfortran
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-08/msg00762.html)
- Fix configure test for weakref support
(https:/
The attached patch fixes PR 62296
(https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=62296). The Fortran
interpretation there was a bit confused (see links to comp.lang.fortran thread
from the PR), but the consensus is that the standard makes a difference between
the command-line returning with nonz
