Mon May 14 13:21:00 GMT 2007
On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 07:13:28AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
>According to Christopher Faylor on 5/14/2007 6:53 AM:
>>>Does cygwin care about providing reentrant versions of functions?
>>>There is precedent for doing this: as an example, cygwin.din already
>>That was probably one of many ill-conceived entries in cygwin.din,
>>then. If there is no POSIX or linux version of a function there is no
>>reason to export it.
>Then here's the revised list of functions I still think are worth
>_Exit asnprintf dprintf vasnprintf vdprintf
>And seeing as how Linux does not yet provide [v]asnprintf, here are my
>arguments for exporting it:
>In other words, there are several existing programs ported to cygwin
>that would benefit from smaller size and slightly faster execution if
>asnprintf were exposed as part of cygwin1.dll, and the size impact to
>cygwin1.dll to provide this nice hook is much smaller than the impact
>of implementing asnprintf in program space as a less efficient wrapper
As long as you're relatively certain that we're not going to have to
stand on our heads to provide an alternative vasnprintf which has subtly
different qualities at some point, the above list looks great to me.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
More information about the Cygwin