From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7613258DF
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:19:34 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21])
 by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Jun 2014 15:19:51 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,533,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="562130499"
Received: from irsmsx104.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.159])
 by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Jun 2014 15:19:46 -0700
Received: from irsmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.99) by
 IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS)
 id 14.3.123.3; Mon, 23 Jun 2014 23:18:41 +0100
Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.31]) by
 IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.10.112]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003;
 Mon, 23 Jun 2014 23:18:41 +0100
From: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>, "dev@dpdk.org"
 <dev@dpdk.org>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] Why rte_snprintf at all?
Thread-Index: AQHPjwbz0aSJjYvEn0epoNdK+kbjGJt/Q+EQ
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:18:40 +0000
Message-ID: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B02CEE0C0E@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <20140623101603.54a5d887@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
In-Reply-To: <20140623101603.54a5d887@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Why rte_snprintf at all?
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 22:19:34 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2014 10:16 AM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] Why rte_snprintf at all?
>=20
> Why does rte_snprintf exist? It seems like a misunderstanding or broken
> implementation of snprintf in some other C library. For standard Glibc,
> I get same result from rte_snprintf and snprintf for all inputs including
> boundary cases

It can indeed probably be deprecated in next release. Any objections?

/Bruce