From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/14668 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow %lf in wprintf Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2019 14:06:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20190913180648.GH9017@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="86769"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-14684-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Fri Sep 13 20:07:03 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1i8pyJ-000MTb-4h for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Fri, 13 Sep 2019 20:07:03 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7424 invoked by uid 550); 13 Sep 2019 18:07:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 7406 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2019 18:07:00 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:14668 Archived-At: On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 11:09:03PM -0700, Brion Vibber wrote: > On the emscripten mailing list we got a report that using %lf as a format > specifier for doubles worked in printf but not wprintf, which I was able to > confirm looking at the musl implementation we're using. > > It looks like support for %lf in printf was added in 2012 in > commit cc3a44666, but didn't get copied to the wprintf implementation so > they're just out of sync. I've attached a small patch which copies the same > fix to the wprintf side. Thanks! Applying. > Please let me know if there's any test cases I should add to, or anything > else. Thanks! Coverage for wide printf in libc-test is probably poor. Please feel free (but not obligated) to submit either a regression test for this specific bug or some general functionality tests covering this case and others. You can submit libc-test patches on the musl list too. Rich