Re: Patch for snprintf problem (bug #1000650) 4-th try - Mailing list pgsql-odbc

From Hiroshi Inoue
Subject Re: Patch for snprintf problem (bug #1000650) 4-th try
Date
Msg-id 448EC7EA.1080405@tpf.co.jp
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Patch for snprintf problem (bug #1000650) 4-th try  (Ludek Finstrle <luf@pzkagis.cz>)
Responses Re: Patch for snprintf problem (bug #1000650) 5-th try  (Ludek Finstrle <luf@pzkagis.cz>)
List pgsql-odbc
Ludek Finstrle wrote:
>
> I make patch againist CVS after yours huge commit. What's your opinion?
>

Is the second parameter of snprintf_add needed ?
Aren't the parameter values always strlen(the first parameter) ?

Is snprintf_len needed instead of snprintf ?
Though the current code ignores snprintf errors, it's simply
my negligence..

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

pgsql-odbc by date:

Previous
From: "Campbell, Greg"
Date:
Subject: Re: [compgeneral] I cant get the description or default valueof a field
Next
From: postgresql.org@tgice.com
Date:
Subject: float8 auto truncation issue in ODBC v. PGSQL