Parks, Raymond wrote:
Owen Densmore wrote:
...
Really hip programming teams will define a subset of all these systems
that are platform independent -- i.e. work on all systems. They will
stick to these subsets, understanding that sometimes constraints
really are freedoms.
I have a colleague who insists that the only such subset is C,
straight up, no ++, no #, no Objective, no C-like scripting language.
She insists that if you stick with ANSI C (C89) you will have code that
is highly portable - as long as you stay out of the hardware. She
considers C90 is just as portable, but is suspicious of C99 as it is
still catching on in some places.
Perhaps it is worth at least entertaining the idea that some platforms
are _better_ than others?
For example, the compilers that implement at least 10 year old standards
instead of 20? No, it's not freedom to be constrained to 20 year old
programming language standards.
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
