Message-ID: <002a01b9fe20$bec83640$a5f9c6c3@johans-dator> From: "Johan Henriksson" To: Subject: Re: DJGPP: the future is... ? Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 00:02:09 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com from Johan Henriksson, Sweden HTTP://come.to/jhewok | Primary mail: johan DOT he AT telia DOT com #UIN 12035895 Second: jhe75 AT hotmail DOT com Third: johan_he AT yahoo DOT com Leadprogrammer and FX-specialist at Real software http://come.to/real_software ************************************************************************* -----Original Message----- From: Adam Schrotenboer To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Date: Monday, March 29, 1999 11:36 PM Subject: Re: DJGPP: the future is... ? >Johan Henriksson wrote: > >> I have an idéa that I have been thinking of. Why not add a lot of unstandard >> useful new C-commands into DJGPP? I know you might prefer clean ANSI but a >> lot of fun stuff could be added and would make more ppl use DJGPP. I could >> even help when I get time... > >When you say adding non-ANSI stuff, do you mean to DJGPP itself, or as an addon >pkg? As a part of DJGPP basic distribution. Maybe as a ? >There would probably be some question as to whether or not that is possible. The >idea of DJGPP is to maintain portability. Maybe we could make it as an add-on >pkg, but it really shouldn't be a part of libc or the DJDEV pkg. At least, we >should try to keep the code portable, so that stuff we do for DJGPP is also >portable throughout the GNU project. There are small functions that we are lacking, even if I can't really remember them now but they should easily get ported. > >