Re: [Nmh-workers] scan -width behaves oddly in 1.5RC3

[Ken Hornstein]

>I haven't had time to check, but I suspect -1 is what it's giving.
>I disagree with your reading of the standard though: -1 means failure,
>and in a failure case there is not any specification about what went
>into the buffer.

I agree with that ... but why is it failing?  If the only reason it's
failing is because the buffer isn't big enough, that is wrong; it's
supposed to return the number of bytes it wanted to write.  My reading
of the code we have now is that it's correctly rejecting the case where
snprintf() returns -1.

--Ken