Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 08:17:35 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: mkdoc patch, take 2
In-Reply-To: <396B6BB3.49C1F993@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000712081229.975B-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Richard Dawe wrote:

> > I think you are mixing two different things.  The ANSI/non-ANSI
> > indication in the docs means that the relevant feature is specified in
> > the ANSI Standard.
> 
> Really? I always thought "portability" meant that I could recompile my
> program unchanged under another OS which supported the standards listed.

You thought right, and ideally, these two would be the same.  But in 
reality they are not, due to our bugs and aspects that ANSI deliberately 
left unspecified.

> Are these things mentioned anywhere in the documentation? If not, perhaps
> it is a good idea to add a section to the libc documentation that
> describes the format of each page? Maybe some kind of introduction?

The library internals are not documented at all, and this aspect is one 
of the undocumented ones.

There's a template for *.txh files in the djlsr distribution (see
src/mkdoc/sample.txh) which could be used as a stopgap for this specific
piece of information, but this assumes that people actually consult that
file when they work on the docs ;-).