Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!cica!gatech!hubcap!billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu
From: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 )
Newsgroups: comp.sw.components
Subject: Re: Reasons for low reuse
Message-ID: <6425@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Date: 9 Sep 89 19:21:33 GMT
References: <13499@well.UUCP>
Reply-To: billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu
Lines: 18

From article <13499@well.UUCP>, by nagle@well.UUCP (John Nagle):
>       Having used a few of these products, my main observation is that
> using software components from multiple vendors tends to result in
> annoying problems.  A typical problem stems from several components
> assuming that they can safely replace some standard portion of the
> standard C library (such as "printf" or "exit") with their own version.
> This is a good reason for only buying components for which one gets
> source code, so that such problems can be resolved.

    Alternatively, you can use a language whose designers recognized
    the need for portability; Ada prohibits subsets and supersets, and
    issues validation certificates to compilers only after they have
    passed a rigorous validation suite; even then, the certificate is
    only good for about 18 months, at which point the compiler must face
    a newer, stronger validation suite if it is to obtain a new certificate.


    Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu