Xref:	news-dnh.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:353
Path:	news-dnh.mv.net!mv!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.moneng.mei.com!uwm.edu!msunews!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!dino.eng.monash.edu.au!junaid
From:	junaid AT dino DOT eng DOT monash DOT edu DOT au (Junaid A. Walker)
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Code Standards
Date:	14 Jun 1995 06:13:59 GMT
Organization:	Monash University
Lines:	54
References:	<D9sMLH DOT MCs AT jade DOT mv DOT net> <3r4pl1$19a AT sulawesi DOT lerc DOT nasa DOT gov>
Nntp-Posting-Host:	dino.eng.monash.edu.au
To:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Dj-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Dave Gantose (gantose AT lerc DOT nasa DOT gov) wrote:
: Bob Babcock wrote:
: >> attempted again.  That's how I'd expect a unix rename to work, but a DOS
: >> rename would just fail.

: Then Eli Z. wrote:
: >That's right.  V2.0's rename() is Unix-compatible by design (as far as DOS 
: >lets us, that is).  There is nothing in the ANSI standard to rule out such a 

: Now, my two cents worth:
: One thing to keep in mind, I think, is that not everyone using DJGPP is doing 
: so because they know or like UNIX. I, for example, am not a UNIX afficionado, 
: but I do use DJGPP. Apparently, there are cases where the UNIX assumption of 
: the Right Thing To Do differs from the DOS assumption. In those cases, it is 
: likely that the pure DOS user will get bitten by a "feature" he wouldn't have 

	Since gcc and all the utilities with djgpp are ports from unix to
DOS, for consistency, the compiler should generate code that is unix
compliant (Note the posix dir in V2). There is also little consistency
between DOS compilers, and even less documentation (unless you go out
and buy the thing just for the docs). Also it will save us having to
rewrite the BSD/Linux/emx man pages.


: In reference to the phrase "properly documented", perhaps it would be good to 
: have a document page that says "Here are functions whose regular performance 
: differs between DOS and UNIX. You will want to be careful to read about them 
: before using them in your code." And a mention of the DOS/UNIX difference 
: would be a good thing in the documentation of the particular functions, too.

	Well if everything is unix compliant, we dont need this document.
But agreed seperate docs for the dos functionality (ie dpmi etc)
are a good idea. Most already exist.


: Anyway, this kind of "heads-up" could help someone anticipate, and therefore 
: avoid, potential problems.

	The problem is the DOS compilers, not djgpp (all the world's a
sun?). After all why use djgpp, if only for the fat memory, protection,
and easy unix porting?

	Since DOS is 'smaller' than unix, most generic DOS code already
works in djgpp.
	
	Junaid



: =============================================================================
: Dave Gantose
: ADF, Inc.
: 2001 Aerospace Pkwy.           phone: (216)977-1376
: Brook Park, OH  44142          email: Gantose AT lerc DOT nasa DOT gov

- Raw text -