Re: scanf %x allows leading 0x?!?

Article View: comp.std.c

Article #2873

#2873

From: Doug Gwyn
Date: Sun, 12 May 1991 03:33

6 lines
742 bytes

In article <725@taumet.com> steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage) writes:
>It is the explicitly-specified behavior in ANSI C.  On systems which
>do not follow the ANSI standard, you may get different behavior.

Larry knows that, he just didn't remember voting on it.
I recall (vaguely) that it was a deliberate decision.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <16129@smoke.brl.mil>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn

References: <161@thor.sdrc.com> <725@taumet.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!psuvax1!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: scanf %x allows leading 0x?!?
Message-ID: <16129@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 12 May 91 03:33:04 GMT
References: <161@thor.sdrc.com> <725@taumet.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 6

Reply to Parent Message