X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
Message-ID: <3FF880E9.2030702@phekda.gotadsl.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 21:08:57 +0000
From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT gotadsl DOT co DOT uk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031031
X-Accept-Language: en, de, fr
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Patch for doprnt.c in djgpp v204 Beta
References: <127 DOT 381519e8 DOT 2d28a6e9 AT aol DOT com>
In-Reply-To: <127.381519e8.2d28a6e9@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Kbwms AT aol DOT com wrote:
> In a message dated 1/3/2004 5:38:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
> rich AT phekda DOT gotadsl DOT co DOT uk writes:
> 
>> I don't think renaming it to __roundl is the right solution. If we ever
>> use (the C99) roundl in a non-C99 function in libc, we will need a stub
>> for it, to avoid polluting the global namespace. In that case, (the C99)
>> roundl will be available in two versions: a stub called roundl for C99
>> programs and a stub called __roundl that will be used internally in the
>> library. So there will still be a clash.
[snip]
> So, change the name to Roundl, perhaps?  Any objection to that one?

Sorry to be pedantic, but I think using case to distinguish two similar 
function names is a bad idea.

How about these renames:

     roundl -> strroundl
     exponentl -> strexponentl

Bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~phekda/richdawe/ ]

"You can't evaluate a man by logic alone."
   -- McCoy, "I, Mudd", Star Trek