On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 07:19:29PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> One more thing I missed: checking result of sscanf for EOF and
> ferror(f) does not make sense; that would only make sense if it were
> fscanf, but the FILE access already happened and was checked earlier.
> Any objection to me just also removing that from the patch?

That sounds fine to me.