Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/02/11/04:53:00
On 10 Feb 1998, George Foot wrote:
> but I don't think the libc docs are the
> place to describe exactly how certain functions work on *other*
> compilers.
I never meant anything but a simple note for programmers to beware of
subtle differences. I don't think anybody will be willing to invest
more effort than that.
As a typical example, a note in the docs for `access' saying that
Borland doesn't have the R_OK, W_OK etc. symbols should be IMHO
useful. The same goes for `stat' which returns zero st_inode member
in every DOS compiler I've seen. OTOH, including disassembled code of
those functions is NOT what I was thinking about ;-).
> It's meant for reference, after all.
In my book, references should be full. But Nate is the one who will
have to decide where to draw the line.
> Does that mean that all ANSI functions are POSIX too?
Yes. POSIX is a superset of ANSI (as far as the C library is
concerned).
- Raw text -