From b87eb3f8feb826ac48463f598fc10476055bee5a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Zack Weinberg Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 14:31:59 -0500 Subject: Use SCANF_ISOC99_A instead of _IO_FLAGS2_SCANF_STD. Change the callers of __vfscanf_internal and __vfwscanf_internal that want C99-compliant behavior to communicate this via the new flags argument, rather than setting bits on the FILE object. This also means these functions do not need to do their own locking. Tested for powerpc and powerpc64le. --- wcsmbs/isoc99_swscanf.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'wcsmbs/isoc99_swscanf.c') diff --git a/wcsmbs/isoc99_swscanf.c b/wcsmbs/isoc99_swscanf.c index 40401d0..f90e56d 100644 --- a/wcsmbs/isoc99_swscanf.c +++ b/wcsmbs/isoc99_swscanf.c @@ -28,10 +28,9 @@ __isoc99_swscanf (const wchar_t *s, const wchar_t *format, ...) _IO_strfile sf; struct _IO_wide_data wd; FILE *f = _IO_strfile_readw (&sf, &wd, s); - f->_flags2 |= _IO_FLAGS2_SCANF_STD; va_start (arg, format); - done = __vfwscanf_internal (f, format, arg, 0); + done = __vfwscanf_internal (f, format, arg, SCANF_ISOC99_A); va_end (arg); return done; -- cgit v1.1