From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christoph Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Windows 9X compatibility Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:27:03 -0600 Message-ID: <4BAFAD87.3070407@gmail.com> References: <83634jglab.fsf@gnu.org> <831vf7ge57.fsf@gnu.org> <83y6hfeyzw.fsf@gnu.org> <83vdcig87f.fsf@gnu.org> <87k4sywpvv.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <83tys2fbxs.fsf@gnu.org> <87hbo1iubm.fsf@home.jasonrumney.net> <83ljddg0w9.fsf@gnu.org> <4BAE867D.3030404@gmail.com> <4BAE9ED4.6070900@t-online.de> <4BAEA525.20709@gmail.com> <83iq8ggbcp.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1269804446 25303 80.91.229.12 (28 Mar 2010 19:27:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 19:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 28 21:27:22 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nvy8n-0001P9-Jd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 21:27:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58032 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nvy8m-0002wt-Rg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:27:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Nvy8h-0002vn-O8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:27:15 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37984 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Nvy8e-0002v3-LH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:27:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nvy8d-00027X-L9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:27:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pz0-f182.google.com ([209.85.222.182]:39781) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Nvy8a-000279-Uo; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:27:09 -0400 Original-Received: by pzk12 with SMTP id 12so5905466pzk.14 for ; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 12:27:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=FlJnsnQf08W/Wvf7R5VmoTpuXewxdT9xDgb1C6dledY=; b=A+8h6xZw25JyLrJL649uevnNvU9EWwb5ZrsJr6Pvn4B7p87Eurwm2GI3hn4gP0HoCa s98EbiVa6zXrHcfYWDQYk9W5yxl81JDjsKIavjqsf8oVwnOu1DLuz2i1D7Lh3kkaR8V4 3wQ9hkRapvmS+mJv6WRf6hnum/lHtlbGfFyHk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=nLYzQANtKtm+xv7MWzonyGVjSLBv/jljgQXfN0S2Q3ccyk29wFy4ELOw0wlsWQWN7M rqMUR7s/CUaSnNjmtm3XR8072WmP6jJ7cNsryi4+UwxDXIrx8ZQ7B1NtSd5G5+9jtJGk O/bCuv/Uep1cdCozKAcytR0W3AEo47Rj/BJ/E= Original-Received: by 10.141.100.19 with SMTP id c19mr3513530rvm.16.1269804427561; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 12:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.4] (70-56-36-204.hlrn.qwest.net [70.56.36.204]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 21sm3212412pzk.8.2010.03.28.12.27.05 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Sun, 28 Mar 2010 12:27:06 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 In-Reply-To: <83iq8ggbcp.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:122807 Archived-At: On 3/28/2010 1:21 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 18:39:01 -0600 >> From: Christoph >> >> The need is in my opinion a growing pain in the rear-end to support this >> backwards compatibility. >> > This argument can only be persuasive if it comes from someone who > personally experienced this pain, which could only be true if they are > active maintainers of the MS-Windows port. > 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 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. 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? 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. ;) Christoph