On 20/03/2023 09:17, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I have committed the two documentation changes, with some minor
> adjustments.
Thank you,
>
> On 07.03.23 18:14, Sébastien Lardière wrote:
>>>>> Maybe this could be fixed instead?
>>>>
>>>> Indeed, and strtoul is probably a better option than sscanf, don't
>>>> you think ?
>>>
>>> Yeah, the use of sscanf() is kind of weird here. We have been
>>> moving the option parsing to use option_parse_int(). Maybe hex
>>> support could be added there. Or just use strtoul().
>>
>>
>> I've made the change with strtoul
>>
>> About option_parse_int(), actually, strtoint() is used, do we need a
>> option_parse_ul() fonction ?
>
> For the option parsing, I propose the attached patch. This follows
> the structure of option_parse_int(), so in the future it could be
> extracted and refactored in the same way, if there is more need.
ok for me, it accept 0x values and refuse wrong values
thank you,
--
Sébastien
