Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/2001/10/11/15:13:25
> From: "Eric Botcazou" <ebotcazou AT libertysurf DOT fr>
> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 19:05:12 +0200
>
> > If you have to put special handling code in the library you end up having
> > to patch multiple places instead of a single location (we have a nightmare
> > in our seek implementations today).
>
> I agree that's not the funniest thing to deal with (may I let you remark
> though that the same situation already exists for libc/dos/dir/findfir.c and
> libc/dos/compat/d_findf.c, same thing for src/libc/dos/dir/findnext.c and
> src/libc/dos/compat/d_findf.c ?)
No, this is slightly different. _dos_findfirst only supports short
file names, for compatibility with DOS MSC compilers. So it is not
equivalent to findfirst.
> Then I think a better solution than a high-level wrapper could be a
> low-level wrapper on top of which both findfirst() and _findfirst() woud
> live: it would be as close as possible to the DOS functions (DOS time
> format, handle exposed, no automatic release of the handle).
That's what I meant: take most of the guts of findfirst, move it to
some new low-level function, and make both findfirst and _findfirst
call that new function.
> But it would
> mean three more files because of the 'one function per file' rule.
Don't worry about this, we don't have any problems with adding a few
more modules to the library.
- Raw text -