Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!goanna!ok
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why use (void) func() ?
Message-ID: <3837@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 26 Sep 90 06:19:31 GMT
References: <586@dptechno.UUCP> <3819@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> <1990Sep25.163906.4187@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 18

In article <1990Sep25.163906.4187@zoo.toronto.edu>, henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
> For printf, it is usually a whole lot simpler -- in cases where it matters,
> which it often doesn't -- to just check ferror() near the end.

I haven't a copy of the final draft of the C standard.  Does it explicitly
say that errors detected by printf() &co set the stream's error indicator?
I've checked the Plauger & Brodie summary, and it says nothing of the kind,
nor does any of the UNIX manuals that I've checked.  Actually, this is a
long-standing gripe of mine:  I have never been able to find out which
errors printf() *does* detect (negative field width and precision have been
defined as non-errors, but what about %@ or the like), and I've certainly
never seen any suggestion that format errors set ferror() nor any
guarantee that printf() doesn't clear ferror().

What _does_ the standard say about this?

-- 
Fixed in the next release.