snprintf (Was: Re: [MinGW-dvlpr] mingw-runtime-2.0)

[Wu Y. <ad...@ne...>]

I think I am wrong to have stated that a warning could be given when using
_snprintf in -ansi mode. It should not. According to Microsoft, using an
underline-beginning function means you know that it is non-portable so that
no warning will be given even in ANSI-compliant mode.

Outputting a warning when using snprintf with C99 macro not defined seems
OK, but I am afraid it may conflict with some project already defining
snprintf. Maybe we need to check some projects first. It's important not to
break existing code, I suppose.

Also notice that as I mentioned in a previous posting that an snprintf
relying on _vsnprintf is not truly C99-compliant since the return value is
not compliant when buffer is not enough.

I even think we do not have to implement a C99-compliant snprintf. Just
personal opinions. I will not object to it, either.

Best regards,

Wu Yongwei