Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site mordred.purdue.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!pucc-j!purdue!chk
From: chk@purdue.UUCP (Chuck Koelbel)
Newsgroups: net.singles,net.cse
Subject: Re: portable code
Message-ID: <517@mordred.purdue.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 3-Mar-86 21:31:16 EST
Article-I.D.: mordred.517
Posted: Mon Mar  3 21:31:16 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 5-Mar-86 04:43:52 EST
References: <653@moscom.UUCP> <569@hoptoad.uucp>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.singles:10657 net.cse:665
Summary: Why is this in net.singles?

In article <569@hoptoad.uucp>, laura@hoptoad.uucp (Laura Creighton) writes:
> In article <653@moscom.UUCP> jens@moscom.UUCP (Jens Fiederer) writes:
> >
> >Dear Laura:
> >
> >I think accusing people whose C code does not pass lint, assumes ints are
> >n bytes long, who don't check return codes from function codes, etc. of
> >being unprofessional is going a bit far.  Yes, their code is not portable.
> >If their intention was to write portable code, your accusation hits home.
> >Otherwise they might be entirely unconcerned.
> 
> It is this ``entirely unconcerned'' attitude that bothers me.  That is what
> is unprofessional.  To be a professional is to do the best possible job
> even under adverse circumstances.  It is possible to learn how to write
> protable code, and possible to discipline yourself so that you do not
> write unportable code.  I know lots of people who do this routinely.
> I know lots of people who would like to do this but do not know how.  This
> is why I am writing a book.  And I know lots of people who really don't
> care.  And these people I call unprofessional.
[101 lines deleted]

Is this really the type of material that needs to be cross-posted to
net.singles?
Could you please only post this discussion to net.cse? Thanks.