Lan Barnes wrote: > On Tue, October 23, 2007 8:07 pm, Carl Lowenstein wrote: >> On 10/23/07, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Carl Lowenstein wrote: >>>> On 10/23/07, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> What does: >>>>> #include <stdio.h> >>>>> >>>>> mean? Which stdio.h? From where? In what order? >>>> Is this a rhetorical question? >>> Yes, it is rhetorical. >>> >>> The point is that a zillion things *outside of your control* can affect >>> the answer to that question. >>> >>> And, I'm pretty sure your answer isn't valid if things have been built >>> for newlib (a standard library for embedded systems). >>> >> I thought that if you were building software for a non-standard system >> that you should not blindly #include <stdio.h> but would explicitly >> include the headers appropriate for that system. >> >> carl >> -- >> > > I'm a little surprised that all of you blithely assume that C/C++ or Java > are the only development languages. I expect that kind of parochial > thinking from PHBs, who think compiled code protects their "intellectual > property," but you guys are open sourcers. What about Tcl/Tk? What about > Python? Both manage the small stuff, allow rapid prototyping which can be > migrated to the solution, scale very well, and can be optimized (I'm > assuming Python can) with C/C++ where performance needs it. > > MythTV (which is on my mind a lot these days) could probably have been > done faster and with fewer segfault defects in Tcl/Tk. My hat's off to > them for what they've done in C, but I can't help but think it would have > been easier and more robust in a scripting language. >
The software in existence at t=now is roughly an appropriate match to hardware and software art of t=now-10 years. Regards, ..j -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
