Date: Mon, 26 May 2003 14:54:53 -0400
Message-Id: <200305261854.h4QIsreV022495@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <3ED25E99.DB2873C3@yahoo.com> (message from CBFalconer on Mon, 26
	May 2003 14:36:09 -0400)
Subject: Re: Ggets - Propose addition to 2.04 library
References:  <3ED25E99 DOT DB2873C3 AT yahoo DOT com>
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


I think the biggest reason to not do this is the pollution in the
header files.  If someone happens to write their own ggets (same
functionality or otherwise), or if the prototype for the "official"
ggets changes, then we'll be causing problem.

If this were something that glibc included, I'd have no problem with
it.

On the other hand, we have lots of other functions which exceed
ansi/posix (although we've had trouble with a few of them before,
too).