Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 14:05:29 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
cc: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>, george DOT foot AT merton DOT oxford DOT ac DOT uk,
        djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Patch to mkdoc and re: portability information
In-Reply-To: <35E43C36.FE7E2EBC@cartsys.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980827140518.6326I-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Wed, 26 Aug 1998, Nate Eldredge wrote:

> > Am I misunderstanding you?  It sounds vaguely like you're talking about
> 
> When you're documenting a difference, it doesn't matter which way you
> look at it.

I agree.  If the information is there, it helps both ways.

> I just want to make sure that "dos" is as specific as we get.

What I had in mind for the interpretation of "dos" is the way other
DOS-based compilers work.  Usually, they all work in the same way,
that's why having a single category is IMHO enough.