X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu (Charles Sandmann)
Message-Id: <10112151622.AA23311@clio.rice.edu>
Subject: Re: libemu and profiling (LONG) [Was: Re: Building a profiled version of
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 10:22:55 -0600 (CST)
Cc: rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
In-Reply-To: <3C1B300A.F50EEBB3@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> from "Richard Dawe" at Dec 15, 2001 11:12:10 AM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> It seems I've been a bit hasty in committing patches to CVS, due to
> eagerness. I apologise for this. I'll wait longer in the future. 

Actually I believe in early commits and just changing it in CVS.  That
way you actually have a record of code ideas that might be useful in
the future.  But I also understand the people issues - and this is a
volunteer effort that everyone shouldn't be required to read their
email daily and be a slave to making review comments quickly.  I'm
thick skinned and much more likely to offend than be offended.  If 
you commit it and I didn't like it, I'd send of a note and change
it in CVS if I felt strongly.  (Thus, I didn't feel strongly about it).

I'm more guilty than you are about quick commits...  (and pretty unlikely
to wait a week since I'd have forgotten what I was doing by then...)
Group, feel free to flame me when I misbehave ...

> below is a patch to remove 'errno' as Charles suggests. If no-one objects,
> I'll commit it next Saturday (GMT).

Today since errno is in it's own module, no problems.  What's in cvs 
won't break anything unless something else changes.  The fix just makes
this dead code a little smaller and is defensive for the future.  (Yes,
I'm thinking about a real libc implementation as a set of DXE/DLLs -
this win2k stuff just really hacked me off).

Thanks for the update.