Xref: news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:7237
From: Malcolm Douglas <douglas AT berkshire DOT net>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: RHIDE and DJGPP
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 21:41:51 -0400
Organization: B e r k s h i r e N e t
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <32112EDF.35D2@berkshire.net>
References: <320FC47B DOT 4AB1 AT mindspring DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp08.berkshire.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Joshua Cannon Butcher wrote:

> 
> 7)      And for everyone in General, why do you have to stray away from
> industry standards?  Calling object files .O files instead of .OBJ,
> calling C++ files .CC instead of .CPP, and .a instead of .LIB for
> library.  HELLO!  Its not copyright infringement to use the same
> extensions, and it would make the transition for existing C and C++
> users to use.  This is quite frankly scaring me, and almost makes me
> want to pay the $500 for Borland C++ 5.0 so I can have the "standard" of
> the computer programming industry.
> 

DJGPP is a port of gcc, and since gcc is from unix it follows different
standards.  Changing these would cause confusion since .a and .LIB files
etc. are not compatable with each other.

As for your suggestions to rhide, I can only say that the source is
distributed so if you can add the features that you feel would improve
it.

-- 
Malcolm Douglas
douglas AT loomis DOT berkshire DOT net