Re: [PATCH] printf: add %#s alias to %b

[Dragan Simic]

On 2023-09-06 15:07, Chet Ramey wrote:
> On 9/6/23 6:28 AM, Dragan Simic wrote:
>
> > > No invalidation would be happening now, merely a note in the coming 
> > > standard
> > > that the %b in printf(1) would (might) be removed in a later version 
> > > of
> > > the standard - so implementations have time to implement something to
> > > replace it, and applications to stop using %b in printf(1).   The 
> > > next
> > > version of the standard isn't likely for at least another decade (the
> > > coming one isn't finished yet, and that's not the next that counts 
> > > here,
> > > and later issues that are merely corrections (TCs) don't count 
> > > either).
> > > [As a reference for timelines, the current POSIX standard is from 
> > > 2008,
> > > though a couple of TCs have followed it - that's 15 years already
> > > between versions.]
> >
> > Thank you for this detailed clarification.  It's good to know that the 
> > 2013,
> > 2016 and 2018 versions/revisions of POSIX actually don't count.
>
> That's not what he said.

Huh, quite frankly, this makes me confused a bit.  Now I'm wondering 
what actually are the 2013, 2016 and 2018 revisions of POSIX?  I'd 
really appreciate further clarification, but please keep in mind that 
I'm referring to the HTML stuff downloadable for free from The Open 
Group, such as the 2017/2018 revision linked below.

https://publications.opengroup.org/c181

Is the stated IEEE Std 1003.1 the right stuff at all?  The web page says 
that it also has a couple of TCs integrated, so I'd guess that it is the 
right stuff, which the link below also suggests by explaining IEEE Std 
1003.1 further.

https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1003.1/7101/

Quite frankly, all this is confusing, and even more is confusing why 
such standards aren't available for free to anyone interested in that 
matter.  That's ridiculous, IMHO.