Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 18:48:02 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <199710232248.SAA06508@delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: Vik DOT Heyndrickx AT rug DOT ac DOT be
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <344F2649.5B48@rug.ac.be> (message from Vik Heyndrickx on Thu, 23
	Oct 1997 12:26:17 +0200)
Subject: Re: proposal: movedata, dosmemget, etc. replacement
Precedence: bulk


> I assume that was caused by the fact that those functions were not
> implemented at the same time and by different people.

No, most of them need to be compatible with other implementations.
Besides, the non-standard ones were all done by me.  So many people
use the existing order that changing it is no longer an option.

> Note the unusual order of offset and segment.

This is an argument against your changes.

I think that, overall, we shouldn't add these functions.  All they'll
do is add yet another set of functions that don't match the other
functions.  If you want to create a third-party far memory library and
distribute it, that's fine.  I'd rather not make significant changes
to djgpp's core library like these.  Note that the functions you
suggest replacing have been around for many years, and a *lot* of
people use them.