A couple of Questions

[Tony van der Hoff]

On 28 Jul 2001, in message <f65e3ba14a.Jo at village.uunet.be>,
John Tytgat <John.Tytgat at aaug.net> wrote:

> In message <2b15b3a04a.Tony at mk-net.demon.co.uk>
>           Tony van der Hoff <tony at mk-net.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Forget OSLibSupport for now. It is not OSLib, and has nothing to do
> > with a generation of C++ headers. Ideally, once C++ OSlib headers are
> > available, a new support library should be written in C++.
> 
> Won't that exclude the people who want to compile RISC OS modules using
> OSLib ?
> 
I don't understand why you think it should. I'm not thinking of abandoning
OSLibSupport; but of introducing OSLibSupport++ in addition.

I'm certainly insisting that current C header generation is retained, to
avoid that sort of conflict.

-- 
Tony van der Hoff         | MailTo:tony at mk-net.demon.co.uk
                          | MailTo:avanderhoff at iee.org
Buckinghamshire, England  | http:www.mk-net.demon.co.uk