On Feb 21, 2014, at 8:44 , steve donovan wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 9:35 AM, René Rebe <firstname.lastname@example.org
Why is it you insists so much to refuse to improve a Lua core function to
return more precisely what the underlying system actually returned?
Because, when will it stop? We all now that bad implementations and
ambiguities have created broken C run times. Should Lua compensate
for all of them?
This is not compensating for brokenness, this is copying the whole result of the C function into the Lua string.
(There are exceptions which make sense: e.g. Windows' strftime is so
broken that it will crash when passed formatting options it does not
understand, so 5.2 checks the input)