[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Windows 9X compatibility

From: Christoph
Subject: Re: Windows 9X compatibility
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:04:28 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3

On 3/28/2010 2:18 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
is_windows_9x is a 12-line function whose all calls but the very first
one just return the value of a static variable.
Right, I was just commenting on the mere existence of such function and its use to disable certain features, which in my mind seems kludgy for an OS that has been abandoned by its manufacturer, i.e. no more updates, bugfixes etc. But, I think your explanations in response to Oscars email made the intent of this clearer for me, i.e. what the status of support for legacy systems like Win9x is.

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 just googled the UNC issue with Windows' stat and found that it actually supports UNC paths (in recent implementations at least), but there might be some other issues that I don't know about. Anyway, those were examples where comments led me to believe that there might be a cleaner solution for this nowadays, compared to what was available 15 years ago or when the code was initially written.
Maybe.  But it's hard to talk about this on this general level.
Specific suggestions to remove old compatibility code are welcome.
Yes, I will dig around some more and see what I come up with. Which should help me get familiar with the code.
Your contributions, past and future, are welcome.  Thanks.
Thank you.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]