Prototype is wrong. Take a look at the K.3.6.3.2.

Indent is wrong.

Why did you put the symbol under 1.5 version ?

May suggest some wordsmithing, for English readability?

The qsort_s function behaves the same as qsort_r, except that

• The order of arguments to compar is different
• If nmemb or size are greater than RSIZE_MAX, or nmemb is non-zero and compar is NULL, then the runtime-constraint handler is called, and qsort_s returns an error. Note that the handler is called before qsort_s returns the error, and that the handler itself does not return.

(Assuming I interpreted the existing wording correctly; it's a little hard to follow, which is why I'm suggesting the re-wording.)

If the glibc version of qsort_r() is using non-standard ordering, perhaps note that? i.e.

and the non-standard GNU libc implementation of

I wouldn't necessarily write that GNU is non-standard since the real problem is that there is no standard for qsort_r... I guess glibc just did whatever seemed easiest for their qsort.

void* context is the last argument for qsort_s

Where should it go instead?

I don't think so - the standard doesn't seem to define the actual error to return?

True, I don't think we need to be testing the specific implementation here so we could theoretically reuse the test for other implementations.

I think looking at the other symbol.map files 1.6 is the version for 13?

Why not merge this and previous line ?

To the current version for CURRENT-13, which is 1.6.

Ah, now I get it. I only looked at this particular Symbol.map.