Date: Sat, 22 Apr 95 14:31:53 EDT
From: peprbv AT cfa0 DOT harvard DOT edu (Bob Babcock)
To: djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject: Re: TTY Flags
Reply-To: babcock AT cfa DOT harvard DOT edu

> It hasn't, but one has been _discussed_ for V2.  Its functionality,
> however, is the Unix-style ioctl.  Please use another name for
> Dos' if you write it so names don't clash in the future.  I suggest
> dos_ioctl.

But ioctl is a standard DOS function.  If you write a unix version, please
use a different name to avoid clashes.  I suggest unix_ioctl. ;-(

Seriously, this is an example of the problem of serving two types of users:
DOS programmers trying to escape 640K limits and unix programmers trying to
port to DOS.  I would suggest that the library should not contain a function
called ioctl, rather it should contain both dos_ioctl and unix_ioctl.  That
way, someone porting code finds out at link time or earlier that ioctl is a
problem which must be looked at carefully rather than getting strange
failures when ioctl is called with arguments appropriate for another
operating system.  A simple #define then selects the desired variant.