View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0000920 | 1003.1(2013)/Issue7+TC1 | System Interfaces | public | 2015-02-05 17:47 | 2019-06-10 08:54 |
| Reporter | rhansen | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | Editorial | Type | Omission |
| Status | Closed | Resolution | Accepted As Marked | ||
| Name | Richard Hansen | ||||
| Organization | BBN | ||||
| User Reference | |||||
| Section | strptime | ||||
| Page Number | 2042 | ||||
| Line Number | 65195 | ||||
| Interp Status | Approved | ||||
| Final Accepted Text | 0000920:0002544 | ||||
| Summary | 0000920: missing %F description in strptime | ||||
| Description | The description of the %F conversion specifier appears to be missing from strptime(). I believe this is an omission because:
| ||||
| Desired Action | On page 2042 after line 65194 (strptime() DESCRIPTION) insert:<tt>F</tt> The date as <tt>%Y-%m-%d</tt> if no field width and no modifier is specified. TODO: Specify behavior if a modifier and/or field width is specified. | ||||
| Tags | tc2-2008 | ||||
| related to | 0000879 | Closed | strptime is missing conversion specifiers described in strftime |
|
|
I don't believe this is an omission. %F was not in SUSv3 and there was no change request to add it in SUSv4. I believe what happened is that when field widths were added to strftime and strptime, the changes included statements that the behaviour of field widths is unspecified for conversions other than C, F, G, or Y in strftime, and other than C, F, or Y in strptime, but the inclusion of F in this statement for strptime was a mistake, since strptime has no F conversion. We should add %F to strptime in Issue 8 (via 0000879), but it would not be in scope to add it in TC2. We should instead just change "C, F, or Y" to "C or Y" on line 65181 for TC2. |
|
|
Interpretation response ------------------------ The standard states the requirements for field widths in strptime(), and conforming implementations must conform to this. However, concerns have been raised about this which are being referred to the sponsor. Rationale: ------------- The standard states that the behavior of field widths is unspecified for conversions other than C, F, or Y, but does not specify an F conversion. Notes to the Editor (not part of this interpretation): ------------------------------------------------------- On Page: 2041 Line: 65181 Section: strptime() In the DESCRIPTION section, change from: ... conversion specifier other than C, F, or Y. to: ... conversion specifier other than C or Y. |
|
|
Interpretation proposed 20 Feb 2015 |
|
|
Interpretation approved 23rd March 2015 |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | New Issue | |
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | Name | => Richard Hansen |
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | Organization | => BBN |
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | Section | => strptime |
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | Page Number | => 2042 |
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | Line Number | => 65195 |
| 2015-02-05 17:47 | rhansen | Interp Status | => --- |
| 2015-02-06 09:42 | geoffclare | Note Added: 0002537 | |
| 2015-02-06 09:42 | geoffclare | Relationship added | related to 0000879 |
| 2015-02-12 16:22 | geoffclare | Note Added: 0002544 | |
| 2015-02-12 16:24 | geoffclare | Interp Status | --- => Pending |
| 2015-02-12 16:24 | geoffclare | Final Accepted Text | => 0000920:0002544 |
| 2015-02-12 16:24 | geoffclare | Status | New => Interpretation Required |
| 2015-02-12 16:24 | geoffclare | Resolution | Open => Accepted As Marked |
| 2015-02-12 16:24 | geoffclare | Tag Attached: tc2-2008 | |
| 2015-02-20 12:13 | ajosey | Interp Status | Pending => Proposed |
| 2015-02-20 12:13 | ajosey | Note Added: 0002552 | |
| 2015-03-23 12:09 | ajosey | Interp Status | Proposed => Approved |
| 2015-03-23 12:09 | ajosey | Note Added: 0002601 | |
| 2019-06-10 08:54 | agadmin | Status | Interpretation Required => Closed |
