Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mcgill-vision!odyssee!pinard
From: pinard@odyssee.UUCP (Francois Pinard)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: back to the (ivory) tower
Summary: Not a syndrome, but a clear choice
Message-ID: <1166@odyssee.UUCP>
Date: 14 Jun 88 03:39:51 GMT
References: <16018@brl-adm.ARPA> <1988Jun7.170246.15101@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: Odyssee (ORA) inc., Montreal, Canada
Lines: 26

In article <1988Jun7.170246.15101@utzoo.uucp>, henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:
> > ... Is alloca really such a problem across differing architectures?
> 
> Yes; there are architectures on which it is very difficult to implement
> efficiently.  Stallman appears to have a mild case of the "all the world's
> a VAX" syndrome:  he cares about portability only when it doesn't get in
> his way.

I've the feeling that you are not completely fair.  Stallman made
clear choices for the GNU project, and portability in itself is not an
real issue.  In the context of GNU, to "think portable" and "write
portable" may help to see and understand aspects of one given problem,
solutions that are portable may even be interesting in themselves
because they are sometimes more general and more clear.  But if
portability gets in the way, it is put aside, simply.

These choices are not new, they are well documented inside the GNU
project.  Stallman, to my own way of seeing things, contributed a lot
and in several ways to the programming community.  Alas, I often have
the impression that a lot of people are simply standing around, crying
for "more!, more!".  This is not the best way to help.
-- 
-------------------    ---------    ------------------------------------------
Francois Pinard        "Vivement    C.P. 886, L'Epiphanie (Qc), Canada J0K 1J0
pinard@odyssee.uucp       GNU!"     (514)588-4656; Odyssee R.A.: (514)279-0716
-------------------    ---------    ------------------------------------------