Drop Win9x support? (was: Serious performance problems)

Igor Pechtchanski pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
Mon Jun 6 06:45:00 GMT 2005

Yuk.  Top-posting.  Reformatted.

On Sun, 5 Jun 2005, Linda W wrote:

> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
> > [snip]
> > Again, IMO, it would be ok to make Win9x functionality slower,
> > external to the Cygwin DLL, etc, etc, but I don't think dropping it
> > altogether is a good idea.
> > 	Igor
> One wouldn't have to suffer much in performance...
> see http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2005-06/msg00087.html.
> Dynamic library linking is relatively cheap -- cheaper if the
> user has the option to pre-install the lib for their OS-flavor.

Yes, dynamic linking is fast.  The implementation (emulation) of the Nt*
API for Win9x doesn't have to be.  That was the potential performance
slowdown I was alluding to.  This is one case where we'd rather have
functionality than performance.
      |\      _,,,---,,_		pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_		igor@watson.ibm.com
     |,4-  ) )-,_. ,\ (  `'-'		Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
    '---''(_/--'  `-'\_) fL	a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-.  Meow!

"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT

Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

More information about the Cygwin mailing list