On 9/6/13 3:55 PM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
That's hardly relevant, as it sounds like Bart's work marks a considerable improvement to the existing printf code. Surely we should evaluate it on that basis, and not because it's not something entirely different.
Lennart, are you on the libraries@ list? If Bart's work passes review and seems backwards compatible, do you have any objection to moving from your printf implementation to his?
(cc Lennart directly, just in case) As far as I know, the current Printf has gone unpatched for years and effectively unmaintained. I'd like to propose A) that we seriously consider Bart's rewrite/replacement, and B) that in so doing we also seriously consider moving it _out_ of base and _into_ the platform, as part of our general slimming-down base process. Thoughts? --Gershom