Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 12:36:00 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Martin Stromberg <eplmst AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
cc: DJGPP-WORKERS <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: FAT32
In-Reply-To: <199902230944.KAA04890@juno.erisoft.se>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990223122914.20891A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com


On Tue, 23 Feb 1999, Martin Stromberg wrote:

> It sure wasn't intentional. But I refuse to be hindered in my coding by 
> not structuring the code and making it sufficiently readable.

I was only asking not to touch existing code.  The lines which you change 
can be reformatted, but it'd be nice if the lines which don't change 
semantically won't be reformatted.

> > I suggest to say a couple of words describing the ``trouble''
> > mentioned here.  People would like to know what to expect, and perhaps
> > also how to avoid that.
> 
> Hmm. I'm not sure what the trouble was. Can you enlighten me again?

If that was coming from me, I only had problems with floppies written by 
Windows 9X (and thus have LFN entries) sometimes either fail the function 
or return 16 instead of 12 as the FAT size.

> Does it help to make them non-static? Is it ok to add variables to libc 
> (with "_" prepended)?

This won't help, if the variables are global.  They still cache the last 
value and are still frozen with that last value into Emacs when it is 
dumped.