Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!daveb
From: daveb@geac.UUCP (David Collier-Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: RISC is a nasty no-no!
Summary: sidebar re definition of standard
Message-ID: <2356@geac.UUCP>
Date: 29 Feb 88 16:42:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: geac.2356
Posted: Mon Feb 29 11:42:29 1988
References: <179@wsccs.UUCP> <696@nuchat.UUCP>
Reply-To: daveb@geac.UUCP (David Collier-Brown)
Organization: The G. Yac Standards Bureau.
Lines: 26

In article <696@nuchat.UUCP> steve@nuchat.UUCP (Steve Nuchia) writes:
>WRONG.  It is demonstrably NON-portable code - it failed to port
>to a working compiler on a reasonable machine.  If the bloody
>unix kernel runs (and it does) your silly application should, too.

  Agreed. However....

>Get a clue - portable doesn't mean "runs on X processors", it
>means "conforms to standards".

  The purpose of the standard is to allow portability, by making
machines similar enough that code `ports' (an oversimplification, of
course).  Therefore a claim that XXX runs on N Unix boxes of at
least 2 different OS families is a stronger claim for portability
than meeting a standard that describes (and i'm thinking of the SVID
here) only one family.

  Much more info required, Terry. (terry@wsccs.UUCP)


--dave
-- 
 David Collier-Brown.                 {mnetor yunexus utgpu}!geac!daveb
 Geac Computers International Inc.,   |  Computer Science loses its
 350 Steelcase Road,Markham, Ontario, |  memory (if not its mind) 
 CANADA, L3R 1B3 (416) 475-0525 x3279 |  every 6 months.