From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2007-07-15 22:45:00
|
>=20 > This contains at least three symbols, which are MinGW specific:-- >=20 > __USE_MSVCRT_SNPRINTF > __USE_MINGW_SNPRINTF > __MINGW_NOTHROW >=20 > Of these, the first two in particular, I would expect to be user=20 > defined; we really should have some policy on how, and where, we will=20 > document the use of such symbols, and also the MinGW functions they=20 > refer to or expose. >=20 > Any thoughts? Documentation? What's that? =20 I think best (minimal) place is in the headers itself. eg */ Define __USE_MSVCRT_SNPRINTF if you want snprintf and vsnprintf to alias the msvcrt-supplied _snprintf and _vsnprintf. The behaviour of the underscore-prefixed versions are documented in MSDN.=20 Define __USE_MINGW_SNPRINTF if you want use mingw-specific implementations of snprintf and vsnprintf. These attempt to comform to ISO C99 specification (ISO C99 section reference). */ #if defined (__USE_MSVCRT_SNPRINTF) #define snprintf _snprintf #define snprintf _vsnprintf #elif defined =A0(__USE_MINGW_SNPRINTF) \ =A0 || (defined (__STDC_VERSION__) && __STDC_VERSION__ >=3D 199901L) int __cdecl __MINGW_NOTHROW=20 snprintf(char *, size_t, > const char*, ...) asm ("___mingw_snprintf");=20 etc |
From: Danny S. <dan...@cl...> - 2007-07-16 21:01:58
|
> My ideal would be `man mingwex', giving a summary of what > extensions are > available, with pointers to any more detailed documentation, > which may > be available. Yes, that needs a bit of committment, to maintain it, > but, `if a job is worth doing, it's worth doing it properly'. > Well I'm out if you want man files. I never use man and I suspect most mingw users don't either. html or pdf would be more portable, Windows-friendly formats. Danny > Regards, > Keith. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express > Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take > control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. > http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ > _______________________________________________ > MinGW-dvlpr mailing list > Min...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr > |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2007-07-16 22:36:55
|
On Monday 16 July 2007 22:01, Danny Smith wrote: > Well I'm =A0out if you want man files. =A0I never use man ... Your loss :-) > and I suspect=20 > most mingw users don't either. Well, there have been a number of enquiries about where to get it, and=20 how to use it, over the years, which is why I've ported it, (and Cygwin=20 has had it for all those years). > html or pdf would be more portable, Windows-friendly formats. HTML or PDF would be fine; raw man source transforms readily to either,=20 as well as displaying directly to screen with man itself, which is why=20 I favour it as a basic markup format. Regards, Keith. |
From: Earnie B. <ea...@us...> - 2007-07-17 12:29:02
|
Quoting Keith Marshall <kei...@us...>: > On Monday 16 July 2007 22:01, Danny Smith wrote: >> Well I'm out if you want man files. I never use man ... > > Your loss :-) > I've never coded a man page either. But I sure use a lot of man output. >> and I suspect >> most mingw users don't either. > > Well, there have been a number of enquiries about where to get it, and > how to use it, over the years, which is why I've ported it, (and Cygwin > has had it for all those years). > >> html or pdf would be more portable, Windows-friendly formats. > > HTML or PDF would be fine; raw man source transforms readily to either, > as well as displaying directly to screen with man itself, which is why > I favour it as a basic markup format. > I agree with Keith's favoritism for this. Earnie |
From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2007-07-16 19:44:32
|
On Sunday 15 July 2007 23:44, Danny Smith wrote: > Documentation? What's that? The last 20% of the job, that most of us, as programmers, tend to put off till a rainy day. Five years later, when we still haven't done it and need to revisit the code, we kick ourselves because the minimal comments we added in-line, or in the headers, just weren't quite good enough; `been there, done that, got the tee-shirt'. > I think best (minimal) place is in the headers itself. With respect, Danny, I disagree. Brian Dessent persistently tells us that the definitive reference is MSDN. That's fine for all of the Microsoft standard stuff, but completely useless for any extended behaviour we've added. I believe that we need a centralised point of reference, for MinGW extensions; trawling the headers for randomly scattered comments is the last place I want to have to look for that, especially when I don't know what I'm looking for, in the first place. My ideal would be `man mingwex', giving a summary of what extensions are available, with pointers to any more detailed documentation, which may be available. Yes, that needs a bit of committment, to maintain it, but, `if a job is worth doing, it's worth doing it properly'. Regards, Keith. |