C語言VC6的一個asprintf實現，或：VC6上C語言使用asprintf, snprintf的坑

這是我在Stack Overflow上面寫的一篇答案，很長，都可以做一個博文了。https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40159892/using-asprintf-on-windows/63317479#63317479

VC6 C語言比較老舊，我摸索了出來一個可以用的asprintf實現。

For those with a higher version of MSVC compiler (like you're using VS2010) or those using C++ instead of C, it's easy. You can use the va_list implementation in another answer here. It's great.

If you're using a GCC-based/-like compiler (like clang, cygwin, MinGW, TDM-GCC etc.), there should be one asprintf already, I don't know. If not, you can use the va_list implementation in another answer here.

An VC6 C Implementation (not C++)

Yes, all of the "multi-platform" answers don't support VC6. You have to use this.

(maybe for Turbo C, lcc and any older ones too)

You can't. You have to:

1. Guess a buffer size yourself.

2. Make a buffer that is large enough (which is not easy), then you can get a correct buffer size.

If you choose this, I have make a handy implementation for VC6 C language, based on the va_list implement in another answer.

For those with a higher version of MSVC compiler (like you're using VS2010) or those using C++ instead of C, it's easy. You can use the va_list implementation in another answer here. It's great.

If you're using a GCC-based/-like compiler (like clang, cygwin, MinGW, TDM-GCC etc.), there should be one asprintf already, I don't know. If not, you can use the va_list implementation in another answer here.

An VC6 C Implementation (not C++)

Yes, all of the "multi-platform" answers don't support VC6. You have to use this.

(maybe for Turbo C, lcc and any older ones too)

You can't. You have to:

1. Guess a buffer size yourself.

2. Make a buffer that is large enough (which is not easy), then you can get a correct buffer size.

If you choose this, I have make a handy implementation for VC6 C language, based on the va_list implement in another answer.

// #include <stdio.h> /* for _vsnprintf */ // No, you don't need this #include <stdlib.h> /* for malloc */ #include <stdarg.h> /* for va_* */ #include <string.h> /* for strcpy */ // Note: If it is not large enough, there will be fine // Your program will not crash, just your string will be truncated. #define LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE 256 int vasprintf(char **strp, const char *format, va_list ap) { char buffer[LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE] = { 0 }, *s; // If you don't initialize it with { 0 } here, // the output will not be null-terminated, if // the buffer size is not large enough. int len, retval = _vsnprintf(buffer, LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE - 1, format, ap); // if we pass LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE instead of // LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE - 1, the buffer may not be // null-terminated when the buffer size if not large enough if ((len = retval) == -1) // buffer not large enough len = LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE - 1; // which is equivalent to strlen(buffer) s = malloc(len + 1); if (!s) return -1; strcpy(s, buffer); // we don't need to use strncpy here, // since buffer is guranteed to be null-terminated // by initializing it with { 0 } and pass // LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE - 1 to vsnprintf // instead of LARGE_ENOUGH_BUFFER_SIZE *strp = s; return retval; } int asprintf(char **strp, const char *format, ...) { va_list ap; int retval; va_start(ap, format); retval = vasprintf(strp, format, ap); va_end(ap); return retval; } int main(void) { char *s; asprintf(&s, "%d", 12345); puts(s); free(s); // note that s is dynamically allocated // though modern Windows will free everything for you when you exit // you may consider free those spaces no longer in need in real programming // or when you're targeting older Windows Versions. return 0; }

If you want to know more details, like why we have to set a large enough buffer size, see below.

1. Explanation

snprintf enters the standard library in C99, and is not present in VC6. All you have is a _snprintf, which:

1. Returns -1 if the number of characters to write is less than or equal to count (the argument). So can't be used to get the buffer size.

This seems not documentated (see Microsoft Docs). But _vsnprintf has special behavior in the same situation, so I guess there may be something here and with the test below I found my assumption correct.

Yes, it even doesn't return the number of characters it has written, like _vsnprintf. Just a -1.

2. This one is documentated: If buffer is a null pointer and count is nonzero, or if format is a null pointer, the invalid parameter handler is invoked, as described in Parameter Validation. invalid parameter handler is invoked means you will get a segmentation fault.

Test code here:

#include <stdio.h> int main(void) { char s[100], s1[100] = { 0 }; #define TEST(s) printf("%s: %d\n", #s, s) TEST(_snprintf(NULL, 0, "%d", 12345678)); /* Tested, and segmentation Fault */ // TEST(_snprintf(NULL, 100, "%d", 12345678)); TEST(_snprintf(s, 0, "%d", 12345678)); TEST(_snprintf(s, 100, "%d", 12345678)); TEST(_snprintf(s1, 5, "%d", 12345678)); puts(s); puts(s1); return 0; }

And the output with VC6 compiler:

_snprintf(NULL, 0, "%d", 12345678): -1 _snprintf(s, 0, "%d", 12345678): -1 _snprintf(s, 100, "%d", 12345678): 8 _snprintf(s1, 5, "%d", 12345678): -1 12345678 12345

which supports my assumption.

I initialized s1 with {0}, otherwise it will not be null-terminated. _snprintf doesn't do that, since the count argument is too small.

If you add some puts, you will find that second _vsnprintf returns -1 doesn't write anything into s, since we passed 0 as the count argument.

Note that when the count argument passed in is smaller than the actual string length to write, though _snprintf returns -1, it will actually write count characters into the buffer.

2. Using vscprintf? No way!

snprintf enters the standard library in C99, and there is no snprintf, _vsnprintf and __vscprintf:

asprintf.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol _vsnprintf asprintf.obj : error LNK2001: unresolved external symbol __vscprintf

So you can't use the va_list implementation in one of the answers.

Actually, there is _vsnprintf in VC6, see 3. below. But _vscprint is really absent.

3. _vsnprint & _snprintf: Present but Absent

Actually, _vsnprintf is present. If you try to call it, you can make it.

You may say, there is a contradictory, you just said unresolved external symbol _vsnprintf. This is weird, but it's true. The _vsnprintf in unresolved external symbol _vsnprintf is not the one your code links to if you writes _vsnprintf directly.

Same thing happens on _snprintf. You can call it yourself, but you if you call snprintf, the linker will complain that there is no _snprintf.

4. Get the buffer size to write by passing 0 argument as count like we do in *nix? No way!

What's worse, you can't write this for yourself:

size_t nbytes = snprintf(NULL, 0, fmt, __VA_ARGS__) + 1; /* +1 for the '\0' */ char *str = malloc(nbytes); snprintf(str, nbytes, fmt, __VA_ARGS__);

That's because:

1. As explained above, there is no snprintf in VC6.
2. As explained above, you can replace snprintf with _snprintf and compile it successfully. But since you passed NULL, you will get a segmentation fault.
3. Even if for some reason your program not crashed, nbytes will be -1 since you passed 0. And size_t is usually unsigned, so -1 will become a large number, like 4294967295 in an x86 machine, and your program will stop in the next malloc step .

5. Maybe a better solution

You can link a library called legacy stdio definitions or something else, but I choose to guess the buffer size myself, since in my case it is not very dangerous to do that.

share   edit  delete  flag