Austin Group Defect Tracker

Aardvark Mark IV


Viewing Issue Simple Details Jump to Notes ] Issue History ] Print ]
ID Category Severity Type Date Submitted Last Update
0000932 [1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1] Shell and Utilities Objection Omission 2015-03-17 11:42 2019-06-10 08:54
Reporter geoffclare View Status public  
Assigned To
Priority normal Resolution Accepted  
Status Closed  
Name Geoff Clare
Organization The Open Group
User Reference
Section printf
Page Number 3076
Line Number 102558
Interp Status Approved
Final Accepted Text See Note: 0002661.
Summary 0000932: behaviour of printf %b with no operand is not specified
Description List item 9 on the printf utility page says that extra c or s
conversion specifiers are evaluated as if a null string argument were
supplied, and other extra conversion specifications are evaluated as
if a zero argument were supplied. This is part of a list of exceptions
to the format string requirements in chapter 5 which has no %b
conversion, and this therefore does not cover %b. The additional
%b conversion is described in list item 7 but this description
does not specify what happens for a %b with no corresponding operand.

Although the suggested change would place an additional requirement
on implementations, I believe that the omission is unintentional and
so should be treated as a defect to be corrected in TC2 rather than
an enhancement to be added in Issue 8.
Desired Action Change from:

Any extra <tt>c</tt> or <tt>s</tt> conversion specifiers

to:

Any extra <tt>b</tt>, <tt>c</tt> or <tt>s</tt> conversion specifiers
Tags tc2-2008
Attached Files

- Relationships
duplicate of 0000727Closed Missing %b mention in printf utility remark about errors 

-  Notes
(0002661)
Don Cragun (manager)
2015-05-07 16:27
edited on: 2015-05-07 16:29

Interpretation response
------------------------

The standard does not speak to this issue, and as such no conformance distinction can be made between alternative implementations based on this. This is being referred to the sponsor.

Rationale:
-------------
This appears to be an oversight in the standard. All known implementations are believed to already behave as desired action.

Notes to the Editor (not part of this interpretation):
-------------------------------------------------------
Make the changes suggested in the Desired Action.

(0002663)
ajosey (manager)
2015-05-08 12:08

Interpretation proposed 8 May 2015
(0002702)
ajosey (manager)
2015-06-10 08:35

Interpretation approved: 10 June 2015
(0002729)
geoffclare (manager)
2015-06-22 15:33

This is a duplicate of 0000727, but since it is an approved interpretation (whereas 727 is not), I have just added the relationship rather than closing it as a duplicate. I propose to list both bug IDs against this change in TC2.

- Issue History
Date Modified Username Field Change
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare New Issue
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare Name => Geoff Clare
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare Organization => The Open Group
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare Section => printf
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare Page Number => 3076
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare Line Number => 102558
2015-03-17 11:42 geoffclare Interp Status => ---
2015-05-07 16:27 Don Cragun Interp Status --- => Pending
2015-05-07 16:27 Don Cragun Note Added: 0002661
2015-05-07 16:27 Don Cragun Status New => Interpretation Required
2015-05-07 16:27 Don Cragun Resolution Open => Accepted
2015-05-07 16:27 Don Cragun Final Accepted Text => See Note: 0002661.
2015-05-07 16:29 Don Cragun Note Edited: 0002661
2015-05-07 16:29 Don Cragun Tag Attached: tc2-2008
2015-05-08 12:08 ajosey Interp Status Pending => Proposed
2015-05-08 12:08 ajosey Note Added: 0002663
2015-06-10 08:35 ajosey Interp Status Proposed => Approved
2015-06-10 08:35 ajosey Note Added: 0002702
2015-06-22 15:31 geoffclare Relationship added duplicate of 0000727
2015-06-22 15:33 geoffclare Note Added: 0002729
2019-06-10 08:54 agadmin Status Interpretation Required => Closed


Mantis 1.1.6[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2008 Mantis Group
Powered by Mantis Bugtracker