Portable printf extension ?

[lithiumcat@gmail.com]

Hi,

I was wondering whether there is a standard-compliant way to extend
printf with a new %code that is not yet reserved (e.g. %r) with a
given argument type.

My guess would be to write a function that looks like « int
my_printf(const char *fmt, ...); », with a special processing of fmt
to replace the new %code with the correct data, and then hand over the
processed fmt and the remaining arguments to vprintf.

However I don't know much about variable arguments, but the standards
seems pretty light about what can be done with them. So I have no idea
of how to write such a my_printf function.

Is there a protable way to do this within the C? If anybody knows,
although it's a bit off-topic, would POSIX allow it if standard C
doesn't? (btw, what is the topical newsgroup for such POSIX-related
questions?)

On a side note, although I'm interested in the answers to the
questions above for my general knowledge of C, the problem I'm trying
to solve is fprintf-ing and snprintf-ing a non-C string, represented
by a struct containing a char* (that is not zero-terminated) and a
size_t length. So I'm also interested in a solution for that
particular problem. For now I'm using a sequence of fprintf/fwrite/
fprintf/... or snprintf/memcpy/snprintf/... but that looks ugly
(especially with the size checks in the second case).

[rahul]

Re: Portable printf extension ?

If your char array is not null terminated, you will have to use
various formatted input/output function that you are already using.
There isn't a way to extend printf and the thing you are suggesting is
to wrap the call in your own user-defined function. Here is one
introductory tutorial about variable number of arguments:

http://publications.gbdirect.co.uk/c_book/chapter9/stdarg.html

[Richard Bos]

Re: Portable printf extension ?

rahul <rahulsinner@gm ail.comwrote:

[ Do _not_ snip all context from posts - quote enough material to make
it clear what you are talking about.
No, using Google Broken Groups Beta is _not_ an excuse. ]

If your char array is not null terminated, you will have to use
various formatted input/output function that you are already using.
There isn't a way to extend printf and the thing you are suggesting is
to wrap the call in your own user-defined function.

It is quite possible to output non-null-terminated char arrays using the
Standard printf() only, _if_ you know how many characters you want to
print, _and_ there are enough characters in the array.

Hint: precision specifier.

Richard

[lithiumcat@gmail.com]

Re: Portable printf extension ?

On Jun 4, 12:54 pm, r...@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) wrote:

rahul <rahulsin...@gm ail.comwrote:
It is quite possible to output non-null-terminated char arrays using the
Standard printf() only, _if_ you know how many characters you want to
print, _and_ there are enough characters in the array.
>
Hint: precision specifier.

Thanks a lot for that hint, I had completely forgotten about that
specifier. I did thought about the field width specifier (using a star
to get the width from the argument), but that doesn't do what I need.
I guess I forgot the precision because I have never used it.

So the call would look like that:

char *char_array_wit hout_nul;
size_t char_array_size ;
[proper initialization]
printf("Here is the string: \"%.*s\"\n", (int)char_array _size,
char_array_with out_nul);

If I understand correctly, the cast is needed because int and size_t
might not have the same size (signedness shouldn't an issue as long as
char_array_size is not too large to fit in an int). Right?

[Richard Bos]

Re: Portable printf extension ?

lithiumcat@gmai l.com wrote:

So the call would look like that:
>
char *char_array_wit hout_nul;
size_t char_array_size ;
[proper initialization]
printf("Here is the string: \"%.*s\"\n", (int)char_array _size,
char_array_with out_nul);
>
If I understand correctly, the cast is needed because int and size_t
might not have the same size (signedness shouldn't an issue as long as
char_array_size is not too large to fit in an int). Right?

Right.

With the proviso that if char_array_size is not correct, but is in fact
larger than the real size of your array, you invoke undefined behaviour;
so just don't do that. But in that, it is no different from, say,
memcpy(). Also, if there _is_ by chance a nul character in your array,
nothing beyond it gets printed.

Richard

[Keith Thompson]

Re: Portable printf extension ?

rlb@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:

lithiumcat@gmai l.com wrote:
>

>So the call would look like that:
>>
>char *char_array_wit hout_nul;
>size_t char_array_size ;
>[proper initialization]
>printf("Here is the string: \"%.*s\"\n", (int)char_array _size,
>char_array_wit hout_nul);
>>
>If I understand correctly, the cast is needed because int and size_t
>might not have the same size (signedness shouldn't an issue as long as
>char_array_siz e is not too large to fit in an int). Right?

>
Right.
>
With the proviso that if char_array_size is not correct, but is in fact
larger than the real size of your array, you invoke undefined behaviour;
so just don't do that. But in that, it is no different from, say,
memcpy(). Also, if there _is_ by chance a nul character in your array,
nothing beyond it gets printed.

To be precise, neither the nul character nor anything beyond it gets
printed.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Nokia
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"