X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f X-Recipient: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 13:27:49 +0200 Message-Id: <83d1fpc24q.fsf@gnu.org> From: "Eli Zaretskii (eliz AT gnu DOT org) [via djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com]" To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-reply-to: (djgpp AT delorie DOT com) Subject: Re: memory.h References: <83h951c41o DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com > From: "Ozkan Sezer (sezeroz AT gmail DOT com) [via djgpp AT delorie DOT com]" > Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2017 14:16:05 +0300 > Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com > > IMO, there is no excuse in including stdlib.h instead of string.h from > memory.h. Possibly it was a typo? Doesn't look like a typo to me: in DJGPP v1, memory.h included djgppstd.h, which was a hodge-podge of functions, including many in stdlib.h. What problems does including stdlib.h cause? Would it be okay to simply add string.h, without removing stdlib.h? That way, we don't create possible backward incompatibilities that could break existing programs.