I submitted my bc because someone thought I should. I am sorry for taking your time. GH
On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Laslo Hunhold <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:44:08 -0600 > Gavin Howard <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear Gavin, > >> I am not so good with Makefiles, so I can see your point on that. > > it's not too drastic, but it makes sense to investigate that a bit. > >> As far as dc, technically dc is not a standard, so if you >> standards-conformant behavior, you need to write a bc that can operate >> without dc. However, I will also be implementing dc in the same repo >> someday. The question is which dc to implement. > > This is not true. What is true is that dc was removed from the list of > mandatory utilities in Posix 2008. It is still standardized. > The reason why it was removed is because it can be implemented with bc, > but the other way around is entirely possible and historical practice. > >> About GNU extensions: this was originally implemented for toybox >> (http://landley.net/toybox/), and the maintainer specifically asked >> that my bc be able to run >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/kernel/time/timeconst.bc >> which has basically every GNU extension. Thus, my bc will probably not >> fit the suckless philosophy because the GNU extensions need to stay. >> Thanks, though. > > Toybox is a one-man operation and it shows in the code. I'd rather > recommend busybox to anyone, and I hate busybox! > You as a developer need to decide how you want to write your code. It's > a mistery to me why you presented it here when you are not planning to > even remove some of the insane GNU-extensions. > > With best regards > > Laslo > > -- > Laslo Hunhold <[email protected]> >
