Re: DOS/Windows-specific code: exec.c and symfile.c

[Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>]

On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:05:49PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
>On Tue, 8 May 2001, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>
>> > This snippet wants to find `foo.exe' when `foo' is being specified.
>> > Should we add a #define for executable extensions (defaulting to an
>> > empty string on Unix)?
>> 
>> Hmm, the makefile already knows about EXEEXT.
>
>So how about adding `-DEXE_EXT=\"EXEEXT\"' to DEFS, and then testing
>EXE_EXT in the sources?
>
>Alternatively, we could modify openp to always accept an additional
>parameter, which is an optional extension (or even a list of possible
>extensions), and if it's non-empty, try those extensions in addition
>to the original file name.  (That's what openp in Emacs does, btw.)

I like the additional argument idea.  It would be a little less overhead
to search for a .exe file on systems that use them.

cgf