Re: new snapshot available: coreutils-8.23.237-eff51

[Jim Meyering]

On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Pádraig Brady <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 28/06/15 21:01, Jim Meyering wrote:
>> From 8fc96e0a280211e7cdf0da5b685c1ec6b7668f78 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Jim Meyering <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 10:17:57 -0700
>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] maint: factor.c: touch up preceding change
>>
>> * src/factor.c (print_factors_single): Add a "const" attribute.
>> Make "n_out" a more faithful count of output bytes.
>> ---
>>  src/factor.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/factor.c b/src/factor.c
>> index 60cf898..5b73c90 100644
>> --- a/src/factor.c
>> +++ b/src/factor.c
>> @@ -2364,9 +2364,9 @@ print_factors_single (uintmax_t t1, uintmax_t t0)
>>        {
>>          char buf[INT_BUFSIZE_BOUND (uintmax_t)];
>>          putchar (' ');
>> -        char *umaxstr = umaxtostr (factors.p[j], buf);
>> +        char const *umaxstr = umaxtostr (factors.p[j], buf);
>>          fputs (umaxstr, stdout);
>> -        n_out += strlen (umaxstr) + 1;
>> +        n_out += 1 + strlen (umaxstr) + 1;
>
> Is the extra 1 really required?
> The trailing one was there to cater for the putchar().

In a sense, it's not required... in that it doesn't really make
a difference if we're off-by-1-byte-per-line when deciding whether
to flush.

I thought the trailing "+ 1" was for the fputs-added newline,
so added the preceding "1 +" for the putchar.