Reason for cover functions in pthread.cc

[Chris Faylor]

On Sun, May 07, 2000 at 10:43:31PM -0500, Paul K. Fisher wrote:
>Is there a reason to keep the cover functions in pthread.cc?  These simply
>call "__" prefixed versions in thread.cc, where the real implementation is
>provided.
>
>For example:
>int
>pthread_attr_init (pthread_attr_t * attr)
>{
>  return __pthread_attr_init (attr);
>}

I don't know of any reason for this practice.  It has always mystified me.
Do things __pthread_attr_init exist in the spec?  If so, the place to handle
this is in cygwin.din not in a wrapper function.

cgf