gershomb at gmail.com
Sat Sep 7 00:34:54 CEST 2013
On 9/6/13 3:55 PM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> That's hardly relevant, as it sounds like Bart's work marks a
> considerable improvement to the existing printf code. Surely we should
> evaluate it on that basis, and not because it's not something entirely
> Lennart, are you on the libraries@ list? If Bart's work passes review
> and seems backwards compatible, do you have any objection to moving
> from your printf implementation to his?
(cc Lennart directly, just in case)
As far as I know, the current Printf has gone unpatched for years and
effectively unmaintained. I'd like to propose A) that we seriously
consider Bart's rewrite/replacement, and B) that in so doing we also
seriously consider moving it _out_ of base and _into_ the platform, as
part of our general slimming-down base process.
More information about the Libraries