"Dimitrie O. Paun" dpaun@rogers.com writes:
No, I'm afraid I don't. In particular, I noticed that the functions in loader/ne/*.c don't have the 16 prefix, even if most/all of them are 16 bit functions, AFAICS.
Ah, so you want to change internal functions too? I don't think I agree with that.
I guess what I'm saying is that if we had these rules: Function names end in 16 IFF they are 16bit functions File names end in 16 IFF they get compiled out by --disable-win16 It makes it so much easier to spot problems by just scanning the code, not to speak of the simplicity that it brings to any analysis tool.
I don't think uglifying the function names just to make the tool easier is a good trade-off. There are ways of doing the analysis by using the linker, and that's much better than an approach based on function names.