[ntp:questions] Dual-core systems - AMD - Windows Vista
David J Taylor
david-taylor at blueyonder.not-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk
Sun Dec 9 15:14:08 UTC 2007
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
> That can be extremely difficult to achieve over multiple platforms and
> compilers.
Multi-platform must make zero warnings many times more difficult - I can
appreciate that.
> It is made more difficult because various compiler accept different
> deviations from the standard. I believe that gcc is notorious for
> that and there may well be others.
Standards - don't you love it when there are so many to choose from!
> In the days when I was porting Unixish C code to OpenVMS, I used the
> compiler options that demanded "maximum rectitude" for compliance with
> the then ANSI standard. (I believe the standard changed several times
> since I last did this.) This found a couple of actual bugs and quite
> a bit of what I considered "sleazy coding" which I did my best to
> clean up. I added zillions of missing function declarations,
> corrected function declarations that falsely claimed that a function
> returned something that it did not or vice versa. . . .
I know I much prefer the far fewer variants of Windows compared to the
multiplicity of versions of Linux - people were demanding exactly this
version of that release with those options. Oh, and they had different
package mechanisms as well! Not good for a very small software team.
Actually having two different teams working to the same document can lead
to good results, though. I recall how the folks in VMS writing the
equivalent of "chkdsk" would check disks produced by the OS writers, and
find how different folk had interpreted different fields. I try for
clarity rather than cleverness when coding. I may even have to maintain
the code myself!
Cheers,
David
More information about the questions
mailing list