This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Inline function definitions for isdigit and isxdigit?
On 09/16/2016 07:13 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
On Fri, 16 Sep 2016, Florian Weimer wrote:
For isxdigit, C99 and C11 make a final determination that only '0' … '9', 'a'
… 'f' and 'A' … 'F' are hexadecimal digits. But POSIX allows more symbolic
names in the xdigit character class. Much hand-waving is still required to
make this C99/C11 compliant because the standard only lists 22 hexadecimal
digits. One could perhaps argue that the additional digits introduced by a
locale are alternative representations of the six letters.
That would indicate to me that a POSIX issue needs to be raised about the
incompatibility with ISO C.
I filed: <http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=1078>
The isalnum specification in ISO C appears to be overly restrictive. I
think it should be possible to have characters which are digits, but not
in the range '0' … '9', and for which isalnum returns true.