Sender: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk Message-ID: <3DE67241.14F3C3F4@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2002 19:45:05 +0000 From: Richard Dawe X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.19 i586) X-Accept-Language: de,fr MIME-Version: 1.0 To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: _Exit function [PATCH] References: <200211281344 DOT gASDisp06211 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <3DE63665 DOT AB50E8A0 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <200211281641 DOT gASGfbr07736 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Hello. DJ Delorie wrote: > > > What does that gain us? Won't that make finding the sources harder? (_Exit > > is in => sources must be in src/libc/ansi/stdlib.) Surely > > documenting the functions as C99 is enough? > > We already have ansi/stdlib, compat/stdlib, and posix/stdlib. > > I originally split the sources up to help me keep track of standards > issues. We're still very concerned about standards, we should still > split things up by standard where it makes sense. C99 is a big step > in standards, it should have its own directory. There's also the new POSIX standard, which feels like a bigger jump to me. C99 seems to add only a few new non-maths interfaces, so that could be why it doesn't seem like such a big change to me. Perhaps just the new C99 maths functions could go in a c99 subdirectory? What should we do with the existing new-standard code that has been added? Namely: *snprintf, a64l, l64a, putenv. These have been stuffed in pre-existing directories. Should there be a src/libc/posix2001 (posx2001?) directory too? Note that some of the existing pre-C99 non-ANSI functions exist in ansi/* and are now in the C99 standard. Should these be moved into the c99 directory? Bye, Rich =] -- Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]