Re: [libposix-development] printf parser

[Henrique A. <hd...@gm...>]

 It could be used in the short term, but alloca is not present in the
standard. According to glibc docs, it's a BSD extension.

2009/6/28 Chris Forbes <ch...@fa...>:
> Henrique:
>
>> require a working malloc implementation
>
> I assume you'd be able to allocate that stuff locally in your own stack
> frame with alloca(), in lieu of having a real allocator?
>
> -- Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Henrique Almeida [mailto:hd...@gm...]
> Sent: Monday, 29 June 2009 12:14 p.m.
> To: lib...@li...
> Subject: Re: [libposix-development] printf parser
>
>  We have to make them too. Lots of them. While printf is not ready,
> the two programs cited are unit tests for the parser and scanner. I've
> put them in the "tests/internal" directory since they are
> implementation details. Also we're missing support for tests in our
> CMakeLists.txt (ie "make test"). After that the CMake build will be
> complete.
>
> 2009/6/28 Kirill A. Shutemov <ki...@sh...>:
>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Henrique Almeida<hd...@gm...> wrote:
>>>  I'm approaching a complete printf implementation, and I've just
>>> updated a printf parser to the repository, which is already in an
>>> advanced state. It's able to parse non trivial strings, like "e %-2ld
>>> f %0#'133.45Lg g %+.hhX i\n". The actual output functions
>>> (output_unsigned, output_double, etc.) are still missing, so it
>>> doesn't print anything yet, but I'll start writing those soon. Also
>>> missing are dealing with "numbered arguments" (things like "%2$d %1$s
>>> %3$g", they allow out of order argument passing), which are harder and
>>> require a working malloc implementation.
>>>
>>>  Please run the tests "printf_parser" and "printf_scanner" and check
>>> that they don't crash or give weird results. printf_scanner should
>>> return zero and printf_parser should have the following result at the
>>> moment:
>>>
>>> abcd
>>> e  f  g  i
>>>
>>>  I expect to finish this until the middle of the week, so that we have
>>> a nearly complete printf.
>>
>> What about unit tests?
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Libposix-development mailing list
>> Lib...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libposix-development
>>
>
>
>
> --
>  Henrique Dante de Almeida
>  hd...@gm...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Libposix-development mailing list
> Lib...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libposix-development
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Libposix-development mailing list
> Lib...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libposix-development
>



-- 
 Henrique Dante de Almeida
 hd...@gm...