[newlib] print formats for FAST and LEAST types

Andre Vieira Andre.SimoesDiasVieira@arm.com
Fri Jul 24 10:49:00 GMT 2015

On 23/07/15 20:43, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Hi Andre,
> On Jul 23 11:28, Andre Vieira wrote:
>> The PRI and SCN macro's were producing formats that did not match their
>> target types set by GCC. This patch uses the types defined for
>> __INTxx_TYPE__, __INT_FASTxx_TYPE__ and __INT_LEASTxx_TYPE__ to define their
>> corresponding macros.
>> newlib/ChangeLog:
>> 2015-07-23  Andre Vieira  <...>
>>    * libc/include/sys/_intsup.h: Defined new __INTxx, __FASTxx and
>>    _LEASTxx macro's to hold information regarding the respective types
>>    print and scan formats.
>>    * libc/include/inttypes.h: Defined LEAST and FAST specific PRI and SCN
>>    macro's as these are not always the same as the INT variants. Used
>>    the new
>>    __INTxx, __FASTxx and __LEASTxx macro's in their corresponding PRI
>>    and SCN macros.
> I gave your patch a quick glance and it looks basically ok to me.
> I'll review it more thorougly tomorrow (I hope), but I have a question:
> How did you test your patch?
> Thanks,
> Corinna
Hi Corinna,

That is a very good question. To be honest with you I ran gcc and newlib 
regression tests and did a manual test on one machine. As I was about to 
send you the manual patch I noticed I forgot to change the SCN16(x) 
define. So I'll respin this patch for you and I'll also give testing a 
bit more thinking.

There is no straightforward way of testing this I think. Though I will 
try to create a sensible sscanf/sprintf test and get back to you. 
Suggestions are welcome.


More information about the Newlib mailing list