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 ?



----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor Forbes" <trevorforbes@ozemail.com.au>
> >
> > 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*.
> >
> > Rob
> >
>
> I agree with Mo.  What is the harm in adding "minor" functions which in
the

The harm is that every added feature requires maintenance (to prevent
bitrot). If the feature is not really helpful (and we can debate the merits
of this particular feature ad nauseum) then you are adding to the
maintenance workload for few returns.

> end will help programmers, port and maintain programs more easily. Is that

These don't help porters from unix - they help folk who ported to pure win32
first, and now want cygwin support. In most cases a __CYGWIN__ won't be
needed because cygwin by default doesn't define WIN32 - thus their win32
code won't be activated.

> not the purpose of Cygwin. Anything that reduces the addition of #ifdef
> __CYGWIN__ would be a "smart" move in my humble opinion.

Sure - for porting _from unix_. IMO.


> Trevor
>

BTW: An alternative solution was suggested by Mumit - the creation of a
msvcrt compatability package that could include such macros - and wouldn't
involve creeping featurism. - I support such an approach.

Rob


--
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]