Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26198
| Path | csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!ecngs!feeder2.ecngs.de!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Java vs C++ |
| Followup-To | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Date | Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:57:13 +1300 |
| Organization | Geek Central |
| Lines | 19 |
| Message-ID | <iiqbe9$q89$4@lust.ihug.co.nz> (permalink) |
| References | <iijbfr$pb2$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iijrj2$i0g$1@news.eternal-september.org> <iil6on$qvo$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4e7634$0$81475$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <iinje0$7j3$7@lust.ihug.co.nz> <4d4f55ba$0$23758$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | 118-92-86-70.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset="UTF-8" |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8Bit |
| X-Trace | lust.ihug.co.nz 1297133833 26889 118.92.86.70 (8 Feb 2011 02:57:13 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@ihug.co.nz |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Tue, 8 Feb 2011 02:57:13 +0000 (UTC) |
| User-Agent | KNode/4.4.7 |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:26198 |
Followups directed to: comp.lang.java.programmer
Show key headers only | View raw
In message <4d4f55ba$0$23758$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 06-02-2011 20:55, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > >> In message<4d4e7634$0$81475$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl>, Silvio wrote: >> >>> Oh, I remember how well C++ and its undefined sizes of things served us >>> when we had to port heaps of code from 16-bit to 32-bit. > > It is 8086 architecture not 80286 architecture. > >> By “16-bit” I take it you specifically mean “Windows/Intel 16-bit”, i.e. >> the segmented 80286 architecture (spit). That was the only major 16-bit >> architecture I’m aware of that made portability difficult. > > Windows has nothing to do with CPU architecture. DOS/Windows is the only reason 8086/80286 segmented architectures became popular.
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar
Re: Java vs C++ Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-05 10:49 -0500 Re: Java vs C++ Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 22:09 -0500 Re: Java vs C++ Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-08 15:57 +1300
csiph-web