delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | "Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer" <k3040e4 AT wildsau DOT idv-edu DOT uni-linz DOT ac DOT at> |
Message-Id: | <199711261656.RAA25208@wildsau.idv.uni-linz.ac.at> |
Subject: | Re: proposed fsext changes |
To: | randym AT acm DOT org (Randy Maas) |
Date: | Wed, 26 Nov 1997 17:56:48 +0100 (MET) |
Cc: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, dj AT delorie DOT com |
In-Reply-To: | <3.0.1.32.19971125104044.007e34f0@yacker.xiotech.com> from "Randy Maas" at Nov 25, 97 10:40:44 am |
Return-Read-To: | k3040e4 AT wildsau DOT idv DOT uni-linz DOT ac DOT at |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Could you please explain me your motivation behind this large amount of fsext changes ? If you want to write a pipe emulator or a RAM disk, fine, but why blow up the standard library with lots of callbacks to your application instead of just going the other way round ?
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |