Re: [boost] Policy about non-compliant standard headers

Subject: Re: [boost] Policy about non-compliant standard headers
From: Marc Glisse (marc.glisse_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-09-21 12:27:56

On Sat, 21 Sep 2013, Andrey Semashev wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Marc Glisse <marc.glisse_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Sep 2013, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>
>>  On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Jonathan Wakely
>>> <jwakely.boost_at_[hidden]>**wrote:
>>>
>>>  On 21 September 2013 08:31, Andrey Semashev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I was reported an issue with Boost.Log which fails to compile with Sun
>>>>>
>>>> Pro
>>>>
>>>>> compiler because it has non-compliant standard C headers.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Non-compliant in what way?  Solaris headers are usually pretty strict.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Missing std::swprintf/std::vswprintf.
>>>
>>> https://svn.boost.org/trac/**boost/ticket/9140
>

>>>
>>
>> Well, it is boost that is broken. snprintf is not part of C++03, you can't
>> count on cstdio providing it. And in C++11 (when solaris will support
>> that), cstdio will provide std::snprintf but still not ::snprintf unless
>> Oracle completely changes the way solaris headers are organized.
>>
>
> It's not about snprintf, it's about swprintf and vswprintf, both of which
> are in C++98 standard.

In namespace std if you include cwchar, and in the global namespace if you 
include wchar.h. The boost header currently includes cwchar and tries to 
use ::swprintf, that's just wrong.

If that's not what the issue is about, you haven't been very clear in your 
explanations.

> The C++ standard defines a number of headers which define C components.
> These headers are part of the standard, and if a compiler doesn't implement
> them right, the compiler is non-compliant. I don't see the other way to put
> it.

"I am misusing those headers".

-- 
Marc Glisse