sprintf -> snprintf

[seanm]

The last commit needs discussion of how to deprecate an API and replace it with another, and to choose its name...

[DennisHeimbigner]

This is in principle a good change, but it involves too many files in one PR.
I would suggest breaking it up to do one directory at a time, E,g, for libdap4, libhdf5, etc.

[seanm]

I would suggest breaking it up to do one directory at a time, E,g, for libdap4, libhdf5, etc.

Breaking what up? The big commit? By my count that would be 17 commits.

Is this to make bisecting possible regressions easier? (Trying to understand why...)

[WardF]

Agreed this is a lot of files, but given the consistent nature of the change, it is something I can commit to spending some time going through. The main issue will be if there are any strings which should not be NULL terminated but now are. I can't think of any instance off the top of my head, but it's still part of the job XD. Also, the Appveyor CI indicates a failure compiling w/ Visual Studio; I haven't looked at that more closely, but we'd want to fix that too.

[seanm]

Also the last commit is a WIP... A public API needs to change to be given the length of a buffer... I used a stupid placeholder name for the new function... What would you like to call it?

[seanm]

@WardF @edwardhartnett @DennisHeimbigner I'd like to fix up the last of the commits in this PR...

How does NetCDF deal with deprecating and replacing APIs? i.e. for this part:

-extern void cdRel2Iso(cdCalenType timetype, char* relunits, int separator, double reltime, char* chartime);
+extern void cdRel2IsoNew(cdCalenType timetype, char* relunits, int separator, double reltime, char* chartime, size_t chartime_size);
+extern void cdRel2Iso(cdCalenType timetype, char* relunits, int separator, double reltime, char* chartime); // deprecated

1. what shall we call the new API?
2. do you have a deprecation macro that does similar to C23's [[deprecated]]?

Thanks.

[seanm]

In the hopes of actually getting this merged, I moved the WIP part to a new PR: #2743

This one is now ready to merge, after review.

[seanm]

Merged conflicts fixed.

@WardF @DennisHeimbigner this one is ready to merge IMHO, pending your reviews.

[WardF]

Testing on Windows for completeness sake; our current CI builds but doesn't run the tests, due to hangs on the underlying systems. It's been a while, I need to double-check that again, we really need to get Windows CI running again (not just building).

[seanm]

@WardF did your Windows test pass?

@edwardhartnett are you good with these changes now?

[WardF]

@seanm I will take a look at this; given the size of the merge, it will take a little bit (also combined with the backlog I need to go through, and the deadline to submit my pre-recorded talk to AGU on Friday) but this and others will be reviewed before the upcoming 4.9.3. Thanks!