Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:26:39 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Andris Pavenis <pavenis AT lanet DOT lv>, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: v2.03: wrapping up
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990427152839.9991D-100000@is>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990427161948.13950A-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, I wrote:

> > Also I don't like that way. I don't like to introduce similar things. 
> 
> Perhaps you could suggest a better solution, then.

Let me rephrase:

Could you please try to explain what is it that you don't like in this 
solution, and why?

Is the general idea of forcing cpp to include the *correct* version.h
acceptable?  If not, why not?  If it *is* acceptable, what are the
disadvantages that you don't like in how I suggested to implement that? 
Perhaps we could find a way to remove these disadvantages or work around
them? 

Let us work together to solve this problem in a way that makes everybody 
happy.  New versions are supposed to make our lives easier, not harder.  
Forcing people to go back to revisit old code and retrofit it into new 
releases doesn't seem to me like a step in the right direction.  I hope 
we could avoid that.