On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 12:18:48AM -0600, Yaakov wrote: >On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 14:42:36 -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote: >> I wasn't fulling grokking the fact that Cygwin explicitly defined the >> get_osfhandle without an underscore in io.h. Sigh. That's probably my >> fault too. >> >> But we definitely shouldn't be going back to adding "_" decorations. I >> have deleted a few of these and no one has complained. I know that >> isn't a scientific sampling but it's hard to believe that someone has >> written code which actually goes out of its way to prepend an underscore >> in front of a standard UNIX function name, especially since we do not, >> AFAIK, define these functions in any header file. >> >> So, I guess I don't understand why we need to add an underscore now >> when we have gotten by with the incorrect declaration for get_osfhandle >> all of these years. > >Because even if it caused a warning in C, the link still succeeded with >the underscored symbol.
Ok. I think we should also change io.h to only define _get_osfhandle on both 64-bit and the trunk version of cygwin. Ditto for _setmode. And, IMO, the access() declaration should be removed from io.h entirely. cgf