Date:	Thu, 11 Oct 2001 09:59:54 +0200 (IST)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, ebotcazou AT libertysurf DOT fr
Subject:	Re: _findfirst() patch
In-Reply-To:	<10110110332.AA20364@clio.rice.edu>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1011011095932.18580L-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> These functions look so identical to the current ones to me that it looks
> like _find* could just be a wrapper around the current find* routines.
> The return arguments and data structures might be different, but at a quick
> glance I didn't see anything unique to either set of calls.

Making them wrappers around findfirst/findnext was my original
suggestion to the person who wanted those functions in DJGPP.  I don't
know why that suggestion was not taken.

- Raw text -