Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!botter!star.cs.vu.nl!ast
From: ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: stdio
Message-ID: <3193@ast.cs.vu.nl>
Date: 8 Sep 89 20:59:42 GMT
References: <18952@princeton.Princeton.EDU>
Reply-To: ast@cs.vu.nl (Andy Tanenbaum)
Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam
Lines: 24

In article <18952@princeton.Princeton.EDU> nfs@notecnirp.UUCP (Norbert Schlenker) writes:
>
>Well, well, a little competition.  Here am I trying to put together
>my very own stdio for network distribution when along comes Earl
>Chew's package.  It looks well done, it runs very fast - but I still
>think mine is better.  Here are the high points of mine:

I am quite willing to replace Patrick's stdio with a better one.  In my view
"better" refers to the following characteristics, in order of importance
(1 = most important, 3 = least important)

1. POSIX/ANSI compatibility
2. Clean, straightforward, easy to understand and modify code
3. Performance, both size and speed

Since I am not in any great hurry, I hope that several beta testers
volunteer and report back their results.  Maybe after that some more
volunteers could try to compare both packages and post the results.
Are there any more rewrites of stdio waiting in the wings?

Andy Tanenbaum (ast@cs.vu.nl)

P.S. To Earl Chew: All my mail to you bounces.  Please send me a bang path
from, say, uunet.