From: Andris Pavenis To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com, Richard Dawe Subject: Re: 2.04 CVS Build plan Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 22:57:14 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 Cc: "K. B. Williams" References: <200211250814 DOT JAA08806 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> <3DE26449 DOT 7A8B1E61 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> In-Reply-To: <3DE26449.7A8B1E61@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200211252257.14061.pavenis@latnet.lv> Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com On Monday 25 November 2002 19:56, Richard Dawe wrote: > Hello. > > Martin Stromberg wrote: > [snip] > > > > The other thing I didn't mention above is C99 compliance. It will be a > > > real shame if we release in 2003 and don't support C99. Would someone > > > *PLEASE* look at what's needed to get there and create a worklist? > > > > Well isn't that a lot of functions that still needs to be written? And > > no coders? > > Looking at tests/libclink, there seem to be three categories of missing > functions: > > (a) lots of new floating-point functions - ~2/3 of the missing functions > seem to fall in this category; > > (b) wide-character support; I suggest looking archives of DJGPP-WORKERS mailing list for 1998, September 10-15 for discussion about some implementation of wide character support. Unfortunatelly it got quickly forgotten after that. Andris > > (c) string to number conversion routines. > > I thought K. B. Williams was looking at (a). Does anyone care about (b)? (I > assume someone would have coded it by now, if they cared enough.) I can > take a look at (c) sometime. > > Note that I updated tests/libclink using a draft of the new POSIX standard. > Some more functions may turn up, when I go through the C99 standard. > > Bye, Rich =]