From:	sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id:	<10303181605.AA14400@clio.rice.edu>
Subject:	Re: nmalloc revisited
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:05:15 -0600 (CST)
In-Reply-To:	<3E7716D3.C692143A@yahoo.com> from "CBFalconer" at Mar 18, 2003 07:53:40 AM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
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

> > It needs to be identical compatible, or it needs updated info
> > documentation describing what's different.  It also needs to compile
> > into the library environment and work with the test programs, or
> > they also need to be modified.
> 
> That last is the hook that I can't/won't provide.  I will be
> providing my own test program to check the interface functioning.  

Is this because the code is incapable of doing these things, or
you are just so opposed to the current interface you refuse to
support it?

I don't see a problem with a different test program as long as it
tests library functions to display similar information.

- Raw text -