From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Benchmarks Revisited... Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2001 21:21:53 +0200 Lines: 12 Message-ID: <3BBE0851.DCD805FA@is.elta.co.il> References: <5l6irt41k9kns8h3j3398rm282b56b6m69 AT 4ax DOT com> <5567-Tue02Oct2001102723+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <9pjrpe$1i64$1 AT news5 DOT isdnet DOT net> <3BBD83BA DOT 7236EF6D AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <9pkvpa$ne3$1 AT news2 DOT isdnet DOT net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.116.55.139 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1002309686 20379132 192.116.55.139 (16 [61365]) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > That's what I was suggesting in my message. > > You were talking about a "compatibility layer": do you want me to add a > wrapper around libc/dos/dir/findfirs.c:findfirst() like we did for Allegro ? That's an implementation detail; I don't think it matters much whether you add a wrapper around findfirst/findnext or write the code from scratch, by calling __dpmi_int. A wrapper seems an easier job, since many subtleties, such as the DTA, are already figured out for you and proven by many years of use. But it's your call, eventually.