Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 21:11:57 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: "Eric Botcazou" <ebotcazou AT libertysurf DOT fr>
Message-Id: <1659-Thu11Oct2001211157+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <006601c15277$3736ab00$d27824d5@zephyr>
	(ebotcazou AT libertysurf DOT fr)
Subject: Re: _findfirst() patch
References: <10110111357 DOT AA18726 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <006601c15277$3736ab00$d27824d5 AT zephyr>
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

> From: "Eric Botcazou" <ebotcazou AT libertysurf DOT fr>
> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 19:05:12 +0200
> 
> > If you have to put special handling code in the library you end up having
> > to patch multiple places instead of a single location (we have a nightmare
> > in our seek implementations today).
> 
> I agree that's not the funniest thing to deal with (may I let you remark
> though that the same situation already exists for libc/dos/dir/findfir.c and
> libc/dos/compat/d_findf.c, same thing for src/libc/dos/dir/findnext.c and
> src/libc/dos/compat/d_findf.c ?)

No, this is slightly different.  _dos_findfirst only supports short
file names, for compatibility with DOS MSC compilers.  So it is not
equivalent to findfirst.

> Then I think a better solution than a high-level wrapper could be a
> low-level wrapper on top of which both findfirst() and _findfirst() woud
> live: it would be as close as possible to the DOS functions (DOS time
> format, handle exposed, no automatic release of the handle).

That's what I meant: take most of the guts of findfirst, move it to
some new low-level function, and make both findfirst and _findfirst
call that new function.

> But it would
> mean three more files because of the 'one function per file' rule.

Don't worry about this, we don't have any problems with adding a few
more modules to the library.