Xref: utzoo comp.sys.apple2:285 comp.sys.apple:23765
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!umich!sharkey!cfctech!ttardis!rlw
From: rlw@ttardis.UUCP (Ron Wilson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: System programming for the Apple II (preferably the IIe)
Message-ID: <2508@ttardis.UUCP>
Date: 20 Mar 90 04:41:38 GMT
Organization: Gallifrey
Lines: 24

In article <2218@tellab5.tellabs.com>, toth@tellab5.tellabs.com (Joseph G. Toth Jr.) writes:
>The portability of UNIX really only exists in the user interface.
>The portability of C code is also a question.
>Does anybody who reads comp.sys.apple2 also read the newsgroups that
>provide C source code files?  Ever notice all the #ifdef's to determine
>what code to use for which system and/or compiler?
>Portability of UNIX and C is a joke..

As an experienced developper (and "porter") I can tell you that Unix and C
are a heck of lot more portable than anything else.  Unix runs on more
different hardware than everything else combinded.  The C language has been
implemented on almost all new systems - with many "old" systems following
suit.

Granted that Unix and C portablity is overly touted - they ARE the most
portable of general purpose systems and languages.  True there are languages
that are "totally" portable, but these languages are application specific -
for example, Informix-SQL is the same on all combinations of OS and software
that Informix, Inc supports - nice if that's all you need, but the real world
demands more.

Yes, porting C programs between systems - even 2 Unix systems - is very
difficult.  But it's a lot better than porting between 2 different languages,
or worse, 2 different OS's.