From: Jens Maurer (Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-10-12 15:42:12
John Maddock wrote:
> Yikes, my first reaction was "no way", but checking the standard I see that
> you are correct. Trouble is none of the compilers that I routinely test
> with (Borland C++ 5.51, VC6, and gcc2.9x (Be/Linix/BSD) seem to define
> swprint that way, they all go for:
> int swprintf(wchar_t * S, const wchar_t * format, ...);
> which appears to be just plain wrong.
Hm... On my Linux with glibc 2.1.2, swprintf() is not defined at all.
However, it is defined for the CVS development tree of glibc, where
it is declared as
extern int swprintf (wchar_t *__restrict __s, size_t __n,
__const wchar_t *__restrict __format, ...)
which looks correct.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk