X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f From: Message-Id: <200501010313.j013Do4F018246@speedy.ludd.ltu.se> Subject: Re: More complaints from tests/libclink/check In-Reply-To: "from Brian Inglis at Dec 31, 2004 07:57:23 pm" To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 04:13:50 +0100 (CET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-ltu-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ltu-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: ams AT ludd DOT ltu DOT se 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 According to Brian Inglis: > On Sat, 01 Jan 2005 02:19:31 +0100 (CET), ams AT ludd DOT ltu DOT se wrote: > > >According to Brian Inglis: > >> On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 13:42:52 +0100 (CET), ams AT ludd DOT ltu DOT se wrote: > >... > >> >Missing POSIX functions: > >> >asctime_r > >> >ctime_r > >> >gmtime_r > >> >localtime_r > >> >strptime > >> > >> I can supply those as part of my changes to time functions. > > > >Let's hear it! (Post the patches, i.e.) > > How do we want to handle these? > The ISO functions become wrappers which define static storage and call > the POSIX *_r functions. ISO == standard C, I think you mean, right? > Do we want to define the POSIX functions as _*_r and then use the > _/environ approach to define them when referenced, have the POSIX > headers #define *_r as _*_r, or have POSIX functions *_r call _*_r? Even though I'm embriated, I think the plan would be to handle these as stubs and thus not needing the environ approach. You just define your (POSIX) functions that does the real work, adding them as stubs to and letting the C (89 or 99) call them as necessary. I might be misssing something here... Happy New Year, Miss Sophie, MartinS