From:	Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT latnet DOT lv>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
Subject:	Re: 2.04 CVS Build plan
Date:	Mon, 25 Nov 2002 22:57:14 +0200
User-Agent:	KMail/1.5
Cc:	"K. B. Williams" <Kbwms AT aol DOT com>
References:	<200211250814 DOT JAA08806 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> <3DE26449 DOT 7A8B1E61 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
In-Reply-To:	<3DE26449.7A8B1E61@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Message-Id:	<200211252257.14061.pavenis@latnet.lv>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

On Monday 25 November 2002 19:56, Richard Dawe wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Martin Stromberg wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > > The other thing I didn't mention above is C99 compliance.  It will be a
> > > real shame if we release in 2003 and don't support C99.  Would someone
> > > *PLEASE* look at what's needed to get there and create a worklist?
> >
> > Well isn't that a lot of functions that still needs to be written? And
> > no coders?
>
> Looking at tests/libclink, there seem to be three categories of missing
> functions:
>
> (a) lots of new floating-point functions - ~2/3 of the missing functions
> seem to fall in this category;
>
> (b) wide-character support;

I suggest looking archives of DJGPP-WORKERS mailing list for 1998, September 
10-15 for discussion about some implementation of wide character support.
Unfortunatelly it got quickly forgotten after that.

Andris





>
> (c) string to number conversion routines.
>
> I thought K. B. Williams was looking at (a). Does anyone care about (b)? (I
> assume someone would have coded it by now, if they cared enough.) I can
> take a look at (c) sometime.
>
> Note that I updated tests/libclink using a draft of the new POSIX standard.
> Some more functions may turn up, when I go through the C99 standard.
>
> Bye, Rich =]

- Raw text -