Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 1070037
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 16, 20262026-05-16T20:30:21+00:00 2026-05-16T20:30:21+00:00

Does anyone know why there is no snwprintf function in the C standard library?

  • 0

Does anyone know why there is no snwprintf function in the C standard library?

I am aware of swprintf, but that doesn’t have the same semantics of a true, wchar_t version of snprintf. As far as I can tell, there is no easy way to implement an snwprintf function using [v]swprintf:

Unlike snprintf, swprintf does not return the necessary buffer size; if the supplied buffer is insufficient, it simply returns -1. This is indistinguishable from failure due to encoding errors, so I can’t keep retrying with progressively larger buffers hoping that it eventually will succeed.

I suppose I could set the last element of the buffer to be non-NUL, call swprintf, and assume that truncation occurred if that element is NUL afterward. However, is that guaranteed to work? The standard does not specify what state the buffer should be in if swprintf fails. (In contrast, snprintf describes which characters are written and which are discarded.)

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-16T20:30:21+00:00Added an answer on May 16, 2026 at 8:30 pm

    See the answer given by Larry Jones here.

    Essentially, swprintf was added in C95 while snprintf was added in C99 and since many implementations already returned the number of required characters (for snprintf) and it seemed a useful thing to do, that was the behavior that was standardized. They didn’t think that behavior was important enough to break backwards compatibility with swprintf by adding it (which was added without that behavior several years earlier).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.