home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 93 23:18:25 -0500
- From: "Nicholas S Castellano" <entropy@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>
- To: Stephen.Usher@earth.ox.ac.uk
- In-Reply-To: Stephen Usher's message of Tue, 9 Nov 1993 14:52:33 +0000 (GMT) <8942.9311091452@earth.ox.ac.uk>
- Subject: include file problems
-
- >>>It would probably be a good idea if the MiNTlibs were broken up into
- >>>subsections which would be placed in subdirectories. This would probably
- >>>speed up compile times due to the decrease in directory search time. It
- >>>would probably also aid development, machine support etc could be
- >>>distinguished from Unix compatability etc etc etc.
- >>
- >>It would also give me a large pain in the ass.
- >
- >Yes it would... to begin with at least. Once the major reorganisation had
- >been done it would be far easier to maintain. It would also allow the
- >complete merging of the TOS and MiNT libraries for all compilers into the
- >one directory tree if it were a join task taken on by all the maintainers.
-
- It would be a pain in the beginning, and continuously. I have enough
- trouble as it is trying not to lose patches.
-
- The merging of the various libraries is being worked on (or at least
- Leif and I have been discussing how to merge the Lattice stuff into
- the main distribution.) Organizing the files into different
- directories doesn't make this task any easier.
-
- >Much of the basic code doesn't change in the libraries... you'd be able to
- >forget about those bits of code.
-
- Unfortunately this isn't true. I wish it were.
-
- >Also... you could farm out sub-sections of the libraries to subsiduary
- >maintainers who could generate unified patches for those directories.
-
- ...And then have a real headache when some change has to be
- coordinated between seven different people. Not to mention how
- difficult it would be to get people to send patches to the correct person.
-
- >At the moment C libraries for the Atari computers are a hotch-potch mess. We
- >need to unify them and standardise asap IMHO so code will be able to be
- >compiled using any of the compilers without hassle, at least the free-ware
- >compilers. Maybe we could get the commercial compiler producers to get in
- >line too.
-
- I agree.
-
- >(By the way.... has anyone fixed scanf() yet? :-))
-
- I don't even know what's wrong with it, besides the fact that people
- say it fails some tests. Now if I could find those tests...
-
- >None other than it's a complete mess with everything just thrown into the
- >same directory! We're going to have sub-directories for a whole lot of new
- >stuff once the socket and other stuff is fully integrated.. ie. <un/*.h>,
- ><net/*.h>, <netinet/*.h>, <protocols/*.h> etc... oh and I forgot..
- ><posix/*.h>.
-
- The first four are all in the domain of the socket library, which is
- not part of the mint library. Maybe it will be at some point, i'll
- worry about it then.
-
- There is no posix/*.h. All posix-required headers are in the main
- include directory. What would we gain by having posix/stdio.h,
- posix/unistd.h etc.?
-
- --
- entropy -- it's not just a good idea, it's the second law.
- Personal mail: entropy@gnu.ai.mit.edu
- MiNT library mail: entropy@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu
-
-
-