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

Groups > comp.lang.c > #5585

Re: // at beginning of line

Show all headers | View raw

On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:28:52 +0100, Chris H wrote:

>>> Yes you can... though it depends what you call "typical"
>>
>>I mean code which is portable insofar as it doesn't assume any particular
>>platform (CPU and OS), but was targeted at general-purpose computing
>>platforms designed to run third-party programs: desktops, servers,
>>consoles,
> 
> Most assume a particular OS.

Most (but not all) complete programs assume a particular OS (or one OS
from a fixed set, using preprocessor conditionals). There's plenty of
library code which doesn't assume any specific OS, but much of it does
assume at least 32 bits for int and/or size_t (or, even if technically it
works on a 16-bit platform, in practice it won't be useful because it's
too wasteful of memory).

>> larger embedded systems (smartphones, tablets, hand-held
>>consoles etc; a 32-bit CPU with RAM measured in megabytes).
> 
> Those are not larger embedded systems.... many hare and have been far
> larger for a decade or two.  Eg defence, telecoms etc.

Larger. Not largest. Meaning: excluding the smallest systems (8/16-bit).

>>As opposed to code which was explicitly written with support for smaller
>>(8-bit/16-bit) embedded platforms in mind.
> 
> There are vastly more of these systems (both in number of different
> applications and numbers in use) than the "typical" ones you mention.

The word "typical" referred to code, not platforms. Code aimed at 8-bit
and 16-bit systems is less common and more likely to be platform-specific.

> On the other hand  I do have libraries that are designed to be portable
> across most 8,16 and 32 bit embedded systems

I don't doubt that such libraries exist, but they're much less common than
code which assumes a 32-bit (or better) target. Writing (and testing) code
which works on smaller platforms takes extra effort.

Practically anyone who can program has ready access to at least one 32-bit
(or 64-bit) system and a suitable toolchain. Fewer people have both ready
access to a suitable 8/16-bit system and a reason to ensure that their
code actually works on such.

Many of the libraries used on a Linux system can be compiled for Windows,
MacOSX or various other 32-bit targets with little or no changes. Very
little of it would compile (and be useful) on a 16-bit platform without
significant changes.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

// at beginning of line Federico <no.adress@nospam.com> - 2011-06-01 19:44 +0000
  Re: // at beginning of line Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-06-01 12:48 -0700
  Re: // at beginning of line Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-06-01 19:55 +0000
    Re: // at beginning of line Federico <no.adress@nospam.com> - 2011-06-01 20:46 +0000
      Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-01 13:54 -0700
        Re: // at beginning of line Federico <no.adress@nospam.com> - 2011-06-02 19:34 +0000
          Re: // at beginning of line Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-06-02 12:38 -0700
          Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-02 13:13 -0700
      Re: // at beginning of line Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-06-01 20:59 +0000
  Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-01 12:56 -0700
    Re: // at beginning of line Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-06-01 23:06 -0700
      Re: // at beginning of line Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-06-02 07:15 +0000
        Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-02 08:40 +0100
          Re: // at beginning of line James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-02 06:15 -0400
            Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-02 11:35 +0100
              Re: // at beginning of line James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-02 07:58 -0400
              Re: // at beginning of line Lorenzo Villari <vlllnz@tiscali.it> - 2011-06-02 15:18 +0200
                Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-02 14:59 +0100
              Re: // at beginning of line Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 09:09 +1200
                Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-03 09:40 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 20:51 +1200
                Re: // at beginning of line James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-03 06:57 -0400
                Re: // at beginning of line Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-03 12:54 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-03 13:27 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-03 09:42 -0700
                Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-05 17:27 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-05 12:35 -0700
                Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-06 09:27 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-06-06 09:29 -0700
                Re: // at beginning of line Roberto Waltman <usenet@rwaltman.com> - 2011-06-06 14:37 -0400
                Re: // at beginning of line Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-03 23:16 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-05 17:28 +0100
                Re: // at beginning of line Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-06-06 22:39 +0100
  Re: // at beginning of line Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 23:05 -0500
  Re: // at beginning of line Datesfat Chicks <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 13:34 -0400

csiph-web