From: "Tim Van Holder" <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: RE: Locking fcntl changes #2
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 18:49:06 +0100
Message-ID: <NBBBIOJKJBNCHJBEKHLOEEEKCCAA.tim.van.holder@pandora.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1001212113000.24447N-100000@is>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id MAA02475
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

> > +struct _DOSERROR_STR {
> > +  char *exterror_str;
> > +  #ifdef __cplusplus
> > +  char *errclass_str;
> > +  #else
> > +  char *class_str;
> > +  #endif
> > +  char *action_str;
> > +  char *locus_str;
> 
> Why do we need the special __cplusplus case?  Can't we always call
> that member errclass_str (and rename the other two to erraction_str
> and errlocus_str)?
In fact, why is it there at all? Maybe the member was called `class'
once upon a time, but class_str isn't a problem for C++ (AFAIK).

> > +/* B5h (181) */ "(MS-DOS 7.0) A valid eject request failed",
> > +/* B5h (181) */ "(DOS 5.0-6.0,NetWare4) Invalid call gate",
> Same here.
But both are valid (and distinct) MS-DOS errors - which should
DJGPP support 'better' - DOS 5/6 or DOS 7?

> "dup" should have a @code markup, and please also add an @xref.  Also,
> we don't use the (n) notation for commands and functions (because the
> references aren't man pages), so please remove "(2)" in the above.
I think he meant a call of dup() with a parameter of 2 (i.e. stdout).