Structuring the Library Files

Suggest moving these to a "pseudo-namespace", particularly since we're naming them after filenames --Random832 05:35, 12 March 2006 (GMT)

I think that the current scheme is fine for the standard headers - it makes sense for "stdlib.h" to be the article you get when you type in "stdlib.h" (also as a subpage of Clc_lib the stdio.h header that you created doesn't show up in a search). It may be a reasonable idea for implementation files, since it emulates a directory, but they'd be better in a separate directory per standard header rather than a single Clc_lib directory - I really don't see any advantage to that given that it makes searching less useful. In the end I think things are fine the way they are but feel free to expand on your argument.--Netocrat 08:54, 12 March 2006 (GMT)

Clean-Room Implementation to Avoid Copyright Problems

I suggest that from now on this standard library code be developed as a clean-room implementation. That means no studying text-book source code, no peering into GNU or BSD library code, no disassembly. This is supposed to be the wiki for comp.lang.c - C experts don't need to copy the work of others, and C non-experts are better off doing it on their own to learn. Completely original code based purely on the wording of the ISO C Standard should be the name of the game. Sure, look up an algorithm for hints if necessary, but not source code, and declare on the talk page all references you used in creating the code - standards, textbooks, webpages and any other inspiration; above all, do not copy other people's work. If we do that, we can avoid a repeat of the current copyright infringement claims.

I also think that POSIX should no longer be a consideration. POSIX is not topical in comp.lang.c, and there's no need for its extensions to be topical on this wiki, particularly in source code for a standard C library.

And yes, we do need formal reviews. I'm still working on extending the wiki software to support that, but in the meantime if anyone wants to help organise it without software support, go ahead.
--Netocrat 08:54, 12 March 2006 (GMT)