Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!nosun!qiclab!m2xenix!puddle!p0.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org!cspw.quagga
From: cspw.quagga@p0.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org (cspw quagga)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.modula2
Subject: Must we REALLY port our own libraries?
Message-ID: <902.268E1B23@puddle.fidonet.org>
Date: 30 Jun 90 23:43:22 GMT
Sender: ufgate@puddle.fidonet.org (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 5:494/4.0 - Settler City Fido, Grahamstown RSA
Lines: 28


 
>From: borchert@MATHEMATIK.UNI-ULM.DE (Andreas Borchert)
>I don't agree. You don't need standardized libraries for portability.
>If you have the sources of a complete library then it is sufficient
>to port your library.
 
Are you suggesting that every application program should redevelop
all its storage manager libraries, I/O, OS interfaces, real arithmetic,
etc. from scratch?   Or did I misunderstand this: perhaps you mean that
every user should develop his own sources and use them for all his own
applications.
 
If every application has to carry its own library sources then they
cannot be called libraries: they are just extra modules that are
tailored to that particular application.
 
--
EP Wentworth - Dept. of Computer Science - Rhodes University - Grahamstown.
Internet: cspw.quagga@f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org
Uninet: cspw@quagga
uucp: ..uunet!m2xenix!quagga!cspw



--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!494!4.0!cspw.quagga
Internet: cspw.quagga@p0.f4.n494.z5.fidonet.org