Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2018 12:30:20 -0500 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Bugs in strftime On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 05:10:02PM +0100, Dennis Wölfing wrote: > On 05.02.2018 18:51, Rich Felker wrote: > > I've actually discussed this before, being doubtful about whether the > > current behavior was correct, but was unable to find any authoritative > > interpretation. Do you know if there is one? > > Unfortunately I don't know of any. OK, I guess the examples will have to suffice. > I don't think that the standard explicitly defines what "field" means. > However the standard also uses the term "minimum field width". > It would be weird to interpret the text in a way that "minimum field > width" refers to a different "field" than "the field being produced". > > > Thanks again for doing this testing and reporting it. Would you be > > interested in helping get these tests into our libc-test package? > > Sure. What do I need to do for that? The repo is here: http://nsz.repo.hu/git/?p=libc-test Patches for it are generally just sent to this list. Szabolcs Nagy is the maintainer. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.