Questions and a RFC [was Re: Assignment from Nicholas Wourms arrived]
Sun Aug 17 17:18:00 GMT 2003
On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 12:43:04PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 07:04:16PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>For future contributions, what is the official policy on doing it now?
> >Basically don't add an underscore alias. Create an underscore alias if
> >the function is used by newlib. Or, create an underscore alias if it's
> >e.g. available in Linux or BSD, which might happen (mempcpy comes to
> I don't think this is right. The underscore aliases were put there,
> IIRC, in a misplaced desire to emulate MSFT's version of such things as
> _open, _close, etc. There is no reason to add underscores to any new
> functions. The use of functions with leading underscores should be
> considred deprecated.
That's what I was trying to explain. It's just that sometimes there are
functions additionally defined with leading underscores even under Linux,
see mempcpy() and __mempcpy() and that's the only situation, IMHO, in
which both would be ok for Cygwin as well. It was a bumpy example,
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Developer mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Red Hat, Inc.
More information about the Cygwin-patches