xmlroff-list

[xmlroff] ...->sprintf (...)

[Tim W. <tw...@re...>]

Hi,

I just tried compiling xmlroff 0.3.2 and I got this error:

fo-object.c: In function 'fo_object_sprintf':
fo-object.c:251: error: 'struct _FoObjectClass' has no member named
'__builtin___sprintf_chk'
fo-object.c:251: error: syntax error before ')' token

It's because sprintf is a macro (I have -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 in my
CFLAGS).

Names of C functions that may be implemented as macros cannot be used
as user functions or variables, and that includes this struct member.

I think it needs to be changed to something other than 'sprintf'.

Tim.
*/

Re: [xmlroff] ...->sprintf (...)

[Tim W. <tw...@re...>]

..alternatively perhaps there should be a #undef sprintf somewhere.

Tim.
*/

Re: [xmlroff] ...->sprintf (...)

[Tony G. <Ton...@Su...>]

Tim Waugh <tw...@re...> writes:
> I just tried compiling xmlroff 0.3.2 and I got this error:
>
> fo-object.c: In function 'fo_object_sprintf':
> fo-object.c:251: error: 'struct _FoObjectClass' has no member named
> '__builtin___sprintf_chk'
> fo-object.c:251: error: syntax error before ')' token
>
> It's because sprintf is a macro (I have -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 in my
> CFLAGS).
>
> Names of C functions that may be implemented as macros cannot be used
> as user functions or variables, and that includes this struct member.
>
> I think it needs to be changed to something other than 'sprintf'.

But 'sprintf' is such an evocative but descriptive name that just
rolls off the tongue so easily!

While 'sprintf' is actually not evocative, or descriptive, or easily
rolling off the tongue, it is well known.  Would gcc complain if it
was '->sprintf_func'?  Are there any other suggestions for a name?

Regards,


Tony.

Re: [xmlroff] ...->sprintf (...)

[Tim W. <tw...@re...>]

On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 03:50:49PM +0000, Tony Graham wrote:

> While 'sprintf' is actually not evocative, or descriptive, or easily
> rolling off the tongue, it is well known.  Would gcc complain if it
> was '->sprintf_func'?  Are there any other suggestions for a name?

Actually, changing this:
  ...->sprintf (...)
to this:
  (...->sprintf) (...)

is enough to stop the macro expansion.

Tim.
*/

Re: [xmlroff] ...->sprintf (...)

[Tony G. <Ton...@Su...>]

Tim Waugh <tw...@re...> writes:
...
> It's because sprintf is a macro (I have -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 in my
> CFLAGS).
>
> Names of C functions that may be implemented as macros cannot be used
> as user functions or variables, and that includes this struct member.
>
> I think it needs to be changed to something other than 'sprintf'.

Changed to 'print_sprintf' (which parallels existing 'debug_sprintf'
name).

Regards,


Tony.