[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Windows 9X compatibility
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Windows 9X compatibility |
Date: |
Sun, 28 Mar 2010 23:18:02 +0300 |
> Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:27:03 -0600
> From: Christoph <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
>
> You are right. I have not experienced this pain myself, but I have read
> the source. I see the function "is_windows_9x()" and where it is being
> used
is_windows_9x is a 12-line function whose all calls but the very first
one just return the value of a static variable.
> and other comments like "Visual Studio 6 cannot do this", "MSVC's
> stat doesnt support UNC and has other bugs" which led to code being
> added to eliminate these deficiencies and support old OSs like Win9x or
> old compilers like MSVC 6.
The latter problem has nothing to do with old compilers: the Windows
implementation of `stat' leaves a lot to be desired, for a
Posix-minded program such as Emacs. Which is why Emacs has its own
version of `stat' that doesn't rely on the one supplied by Microsoft.
The problem with `stat' exists on all versions of Windows, not just on
Windows 9X.
> I am just wondering, if this really needs to be there and if anybody
> ever looks into replacing these functions with native Windows code in
> the latest version of their development tool chains. If it makes the
> code cleaner and less prone to breaking with added features or bugs,
> wouldn't that be worth it?
Maybe. But it's hard to talk about this on this general level.
Specific suggestions to remove old compatibility code are welcome.
> Also, I am not saying the guy looking into something that couldn't be
> myself. In fact, I guess the whole discussion was prompted by me trying
> to find a way to contribute. Maybe I should have picked a less
> controversial subject matter. ;)
Your contributions, past and future, are welcome. Thanks.
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, (continued)
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Lennart Borgman, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, joakim, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/29
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Juanma Barranquero, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Christoph, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility, Christoph, 2010/03/28
- Re: Windows 9X compatibility (was: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process), Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/28
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Jason Rumney, 2010/03/28
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/28
- Re: MS-Windows build broken in Fmake_network_process, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/29
- Serious performance problem with process output on Mac OSX, Christian Lynbech, 2010/03/28
- Re: Serious performance problem with process output on Mac OSX, Adrian Robert, 2010/03/28
- Re: Serious performance problem with process output on Mac OSX, Adrian Robert, 2010/03/29
- Re: Serious performance problem with process output on Mac OSX, David Reitter, 2010/03/29
- Re: Serious performance problem with process output on Mac OSX, Chong Yidong, 2010/03/29