Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 12:06:54 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Eric Rudd <rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com>
cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Bug 314
In-Reply-To: <392937F4.B78491A5@cyberoptics.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000523120632.4345D@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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


On Mon, 22 May 2000, Eric Rudd wrote:
> *** src/libc/ansi/stdlib/div.old        Sat Dec 10 22:33:46 1994
> --- src/libc/ansi/stdlib/div.c  Fri May 19 13:04:36 2000
> ***************
> *** 1,4 ****
> ! /* Copyright (C) 1994 DJ Delorie, see COPYING.DJ for details */
>   #include <stdlib.h>
> 
>   div_t
> --- 1,4 ----
> ! /* Copyright (C) 2000 DJ Delorie, see COPYING.DJ for details */
>   #include <stdlib.h>

We don't replace the Copyright line, we add (actually, prepend) the
new one to all the old ones, like this:

 /* Copyright (C) 2000 DJ Delorie, see COPYING.DJ for details */
 /* Copyright (C) 1994 DJ Delorie, see COPYING.DJ for details */

> I would appreciate it if someone else took a
> look at the code and verified that the new code is indeed correct.

The code seems consistent with C9X draft, as far as I could see, but
isn't it better to replace it with inline asm that does this in a
single instruction?