Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site bu-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!bu-cs!root From: root@bu-cs.UUCP (Barry Shein) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: HARRIS FLAME Re: SHORT vs. INT Message-ID: <658@bu-cs.UUCP> Date: Fri, 20-Sep-85 20:04:11 EDT Article-I.D.: bu-cs.658 Posted: Fri Sep 20 20:04:11 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 22-Sep-85 06:09:29 EDT References: <1390@brl-tgr.ARPA> <2778@sun.uucp> <519@lasspvax.UUCP> <2803@sun.uucp>, <699@othervax.UUCP> Organization: Boston Univ Comp. Sci. Lines: 36 >From: ray@othervax.UUCP (Raymond D. Dunn) > >It is intersting to note in the discussions re short, longs etc. that >portability seems to be regarded as a major reason-d'etre for much >coding activity. > >All very well if portability can become ingrained in our way of thinking >just as block-structuring has now become (to some), but it should be noted >that in this big bad commercial world we (some of us) live in, very few >software projects can afford to schedule "extra" time for designing in, and >testing, the portability of code. Yes, in the long run, it is maybe >worthwhile, but often it falls into the same category as generalising your >code as opposed to making it specific - a good thing to do, but often >commercially/practically unjustified. Astounding! I guess you have a right to your opinion, what company do you work for and exactly what processor is your code tied to so I know exactly when to sell short on your stock? DEC-20? IBM7094? Z80? TIMEX/1000? DEC-10? 8008? PDP-8? DG/NOVA? SDS(XDS)? need I go on.... Maybe you should have a little chat with some of the vendors of code for those machines about portability and it's relationship to commercial survival, as the old expression goes, you more likely can't afford *not* to spend the extra time. Sit down and extrapolate the life span of a processor coming to market today (hint: it's shrinking.)* Perhaps more practically, if you can learn to code reasonably portably, you usually can avoid the major pitfalls and fix a piece of code to be actually portable when the need arises without too much trouble (no flames, I know, a 200,000 line system would be better off portable to start, but if it's reasonable it could be fixed *more* easily than re-written.) -Barry Shein, Boston University *exception: ibm370 architecture, give or take XA I assume it will be around forever, tho that still might exclude new markets for your software.