From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Benchmarks Revisited...
Date:	Fri, 05 Oct 2001 21:21:53 +0200
Lines:	12
Message-ID:	<3BBE0851.DCD805FA@is.elta.co.il>
References:	<5l6irt41k9kns8h3j3398rm282b56b6m69 AT 4ax DOT com> <5567-Tue02Oct2001102723+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <9pjrpe$1i64$1 AT news5 DOT isdnet DOT net> <3BBD83BA DOT 7236EF6D AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <9pkvpa$ne3$1 AT news2 DOT isdnet DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	192.116.55.139
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	fu-berlin.de 1002309686 20379132 192.116.55.139 (16 [61365])
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eric Botcazou wrote:
> 
> > That's what I was suggesting in my message.
> 
> You were talking about a "compatibility layer": do you want me to add a
> wrapper around libc/dos/dir/findfirs.c:findfirst() like we did for Allegro ?

That's an implementation detail; I don't think it matters much whether you
add a wrapper around findfirst/findnext or write the code from scratch, by
calling __dpmi_int.  A wrapper seems an easier job, since many subtleties,
such as the DTA, are already figured out for you and proven by many years of
use.  But it's your call, eventually.

- Raw text -