Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25509

Re: Java vs C++

Show all headers | View raw

On 07-02-2011 22:06, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message<4d5094f2$0$23755$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 07-02-2011 15:22, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>> In message<iiop28$8jj$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Joshua Cranmer
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 02/07/2011 01:06 AM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>> In message<4d4f45fc$0$23760$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, Arne Vajhøj
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> And the C spec leaves a lot of things to implementations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not too much that you can’t write portable code in it.
>>>>
>>>> Writing portable code in C pretty much requires you to do hefty
>>>> compatibility layers.
>>>
>>> Not really. Sticking to standard POSIX types like size_t, time_t etc gets
>>> you a lot of the way there.
>>
>> POSIX does not cover all aspects.
>
> Well, you need tools like autoconf as well to handle the more complicated
> cases.

The existence of that tool is an indication that there is a
portability problem.

But autoconf does not solve all problems.

>> And not all platforms are POSIX compliant.
>
> All the ones worth using are.

Well - I don't think anyone defines portability as
running unchanged on the platform one specific
person considers worth using.

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:20 -0500
  Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-11 13:08 +1300

csiph-web