From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <cygwin-talk-return-964-listarch-cygwin-talk=sources.redhat.com@cygwin.com>
Received: (qmail 18366 invoked by alias); 2 Jun 2005 19:50:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-talk-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com>, <http://cygwin.com/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com
Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maligning List <cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
Received: (qmail 18353 invoked by uid 22791); 2 Jun 2005 19:50:50 -0000
Received: from c-66-30-17-189.hsd1.ma.comcast.net (HELO cgf.cx) (66.30.17.189)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:50:50 +0000
Received: by cgf.cx (Postfix, from userid 201)
	id AF2A213C097; Thu,  2 Jun 2005 15:50:48 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:56:00 -0000
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please@cygwin.com>
To: The Cygwin-Talk Maligning List <cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
Subject: Re: Serious performance problems (malloc related?)
Message-ID: <20050602195048.GD8890@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maligning List <cygwin-talk@cygwin.com>
References: <3D848382FB72E249812901444C6BDB1D03E04FD3@exchange.timesys.com> <20050602190022.GG6597@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> <d7nn39$30t$1@sea.gmane.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d7nn39$30t$1@sea.gmane.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i
X-SW-Source: 2005-q2/txt/msg00347.txt.bz2

On Thu, Jun 02, 2005 at 12:39:17PM -0700, Shankar Unni wrote:
>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>I am leery of doing things this way since that means that the only
>>people capable of writing code for cygwin are the people who understand
>>Nt* calls.  That is a subset of the already small number of people who
>>understand the UNIX and Windows APIs well enough to work on Cygwin.
>
>You mean, like 2?  (Err, 3.  I mean, 4, or maybe 5..)
>
>I'm not sure this is a huge problem, you know..

Just take a look at the number of people who have contributed to
cygwin-patches in the last year or so.  I wouldn't want to scare away
the people who contribute trivial patches because they can't find any
documentation on "NtCreateFile".

I suppose *we* could produce documentation on the Nt* functions but
that's also a support burden.

OTOH, "leery" doesn't mean "it will never happen".  This is just one
of many things to consider when making a major change like this.

cgf