From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77446C4332F for ; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 06:44:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231145AbiL2Gon (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:44:43 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40722 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229644AbiL2Gol (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:44:41 -0500 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D470E1183F for ; Wed, 28 Dec 2022 22:44:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1171B5C02F0; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:44:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:44:40 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=owlfolio.org; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1672296280; x= 1672382680; bh=SkkxLv8BJD+h/KK34HSmdPjhh+yfOXjmMW934ZKa+K4=; b=Z 9ulp1ziRZxhA20CTZn5QtDeRAVv9/LLe9KBwafxfMAgeYG/xFXY0qXQB4ECyFRta dX13K3bggPx+/cUHMj6BosCTL9aZ3KelA7ZsW8voQlZEhDXUl8jM1ypp1ndap07j pOFozQD5T5ndsTTsrkcUpSdw8UpQYHA6R3w5qaMF6124+Oj3ILCRxTnLb+A3TwgW +WFOAvWD0sE/fdxDx+/q3kM1VKgJI2PpRs8ks4CU1O30YKUyCcbHraAes2fnikkE UDsLqHkfLVvQadp/RlC0VYiSPzgPURJwv5AxOjONMiRrmvHkODdXHorq0hu/fyRG MPdU7vXN8NrwL86WQtlag== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1672296280; x= 1672382680; bh=SkkxLv8BJD+h/KK34HSmdPjhh+yfOXjmMW934ZKa+K4=; b=P khlU/y5feGbUr+s2XxNh/uWrqQisWOIwWcJ40D1/nCY+F736diIr/Xu8RuyO/zg5 3HB/aloVddN53TjNAwKKBzjQGvluzd4VNKNU8jLpxfR+Qh+KoOeRxUFprYDkopIx tv0SS6K1JCiMZGzvmkpbOnHhrDoGD24ZwjrainRGL/WxzNx0vvUtlyOzx0UY9A30 u3ja77DzGA5biSAkrjbY7HgFFxbEgtpHrC0zx75RBMp01YHgCCjXgOxmZs9Tp68D UrfVZmSkqlHTkZmbmz0qJRLyT/i55R+xlBBAYmSZ+9d849qN6+2GRbwzZyUzA5kC 2sSgmQQCXG04B2kVgn34Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrieefgdellecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffkffhvfevufgjfhgfgggtgfesthhqredttderuhenucfhrhhomhepkggrtghk ucghvghinhgsvghrghcuoeiirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhgqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeeitdegjefghfdukeehkeeffeevvdefudfgjeffffetiefgkefgvdefleei udevtdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpe iirggtkhesohiflhhfohhlihhordhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i876146a2:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:44:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 01:42:38 -0500 Message-ID: From: Zack Weinberg To: Ian Abbott Cc: Alejandro Colomar , libc-alpha@sourceware.org, 'linux-man' Subject: Re: [PATCH] scanf.3: Do not mention the ERANGE error In-Reply-To: References: <20221208123454.13132-1-abbotti@mev.co.uk> <5f490d45-b31e-279e-edcb-de4806b8ba54@gmail.com> <06f70d09-a258-7d6d-4a98-6a89ed761849@gmail.com> <6269173b-20cb-7b47-1ad9-6099a9baa052@owlfolio.org> <4fe9ed93-8fb9-64d0-26f1-a9560387d108@gmail.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-7 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 06:03:07 -0500, Ian Abbott wrote: > And would ERANGE cause scanf to return EOF in the fixed > implementation? In the counterfactual universe where I actually patch scanf, yes. > That seems like it would break a lot of existing code > (even though it is currently UB). It would probably be better to > silently set errno to ERANGE without returning EOF My intuition says it=A2s the other way around. What existing code do you expect will break? zw