X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200310242339.h9ONdrLo009930@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: Stuff for DJGPP 2.05
In-Reply-To: <3F998122.77E65382@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> "from Richard Dawe at
 Oct 24, 2003 08:44:34 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 01:39:52 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
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 Richard Dawe:
> Here's what won't be in DJGPP 2.04, but could be in 2.05:
> 
> * nmalloc

Could somebody refresh my memory on what is the problem with the
current CBFalconer version, please. This one I think we should try to
integrate. 

(Actually I'm pretty discouraged that it hasn't been included. As I saw
it, it just slipped in. Yes, that was without regard to previous
commited improved interface with regard to malloc debugging, so I
understand that there might be problems.)


> * C99 maths functions

Can't we just add the ones that are ready? It won't be prefect but
perhaps better that nothing?

> I'm sorry. I just don't have time to try to integrate these. Thanks for the
> work done. Hopefully someone will pick up the work and try to integrate them.
> (Any volunteers?)
> 
> * Full C99 compliance
> * Better POSIX compliance

Yeah, sure! Shouldn't this (request for help) go to djgpp instead of
djggp-workers? (I'm willing to make an announcement and to try to
herd/contain the volunteers for a couple of months. (I don't forsee an
huge interest.)


I'm not promising anything. But I should have some time during
Christmas. What do you want me to focus on? (Personally FAQ and
malloc() I think.)

Or I might get a compulsory coding <whatever> (something else, not
DJGPP i. e.), so no promises.


Did I mention that I won't promise anything? Even if we decide to push
some DJGPP release into 2004?


Right,

						MartinS

PS. I might not even be connected between 24/12 to ~13/01. (Did I
mention that I won't promise anything?)
DS.