This is the mail archive of the cygwin@cygwin.com mailing list for the Cygwin project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Linking to cygwin1.dll and msvcrt.dll ?


On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 01:02:09PM +0930, Trevor Forbes wrote:
>>>I am not in a position to judge "creeping feature'ism".  It is just
>>>that these 4 *ex methods are documented and are even suggested in the
>>>Microsoft documentation.  If this memory leak is not a problem in
>>>Cygwin, then these functions should be really easy to implement since
>>>they would just call the Win32 APIs.
>>
>>They are suggested to work around MS's inability to write high-quality
>>code.  The calls would be easy to implement yes, but there is no point
>>in putting them in *cygwin*.
>
>I agree with Mo.  What is the harm in adding "minor" functions which in
>the end will help programmers, port and maintain programs more easily.
>Is that not the purpose of Cygwin.  Anything that reduces the addition
>of #ifdef __CYGWIN__ would be a "smart" move in my humble opinion.

The main purpose of cygwin is to provide a UNIX environment for Windows.
I don't see, offhand, how this applies.

I have no objections to adding a new library which provides more Microsoft
functionality but this has absolutely nothing to do with Cygwin's stated
goal.

And, in case it isn't clear, I suspect that someone is going to actually
have to write these functions and develop this library.  That's usually
the kiss of death here -- getting someone to actually do the work.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]