From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa2.mentor.iphmx.com (esa2.mentor.iphmx.com [68.232.141.98]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45BA53858D1E for ; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 15:24:08 +0000 (GMT) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,287,1665475200"; d="scan'208";a="92091942" Received: from orw-gwy-02-in.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.167]) by esa2.mentor.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 30 Dec 2022 07:24:06 -0800 IronPort-SDR: UuSx2mk5CYeAwOAJmakTjVeP/8Sonh3vWEFqx2xl7Z31tcU8n4WD01MOQw4n8GmlPOBKZ+KQJh KHNe+61vA2ijcb2GVGgU2Whqzszpxze4DwC9gUsBAivExCYLPmrvJLIQvIFFIhyqLJAKHRSnjq 1jzOp5k3KqLhi2M/gkpMjg0o/BohdwITpWVM1P65AvFDOj0WGATGnZxdVFSgx9tnuhtVzyf1ag keoUnhy1U7kEe5/X3hVzbvhnCIeMxlBN4jKAwhiMNTHJ4ymj+k22z1gZC2zsfXQG0GlZL7Id56 U+E= Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2022 15:24:02 +0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Subject: Ping Re: [v3] C2x strtol binary constant handling In-Reply-To: <8feb794b-7d20-2ba0-1a7a-62f8c9919cba@codesourcery.com> Message-ID: <6a2ee43-535-2765-749a-60aa17ceb4cc@codesourcery.com> References: <9dd1d581-2684-43cc-3d44-3d866b226c20@codesourcery.com> <633d137b-f2c2-bfd7-5551-eb4bb73ae119@codesourcery.com> <8feb794b-7d20-2ba0-1a7a-62f8c9919cba@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-15.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.15) To svr-ies-mbx-10.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.10) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3109.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Ping. This patch , and the scanf followup , are pending review. I'll note for completeness that AFNOR comment FR-228 on the C2x CD expresses concern about the semantic change (see section 16 in N3072). Given that accepting 0b and 0B for base 2 strtol was an explicit change in a paper accepted by WG14 with no votes against (and I think I mentioned the consequences for strtol base 0 and scanf %i when binary constants were added), I don't think that comment is particularly likely to result in any changes to the working draft (and likewise for the point in the AFNOR comment about strtol not accepting digit separators - that was also an explicit change in the paper adding digit separators), but if it does result in any changes at the ballot resolution meeting (23-27 January) there would still be time to revert these changes before glibc 2.37 is released. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com