🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <970@mti.mti.com>, by adrian@mti.mti.com (Adrian McCarthy):
> In article <D_D27L1xds13@ficc.uu.net> peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
> writes:
>>There are only two languages I know of in which you can take a moderately
>>complex program and run it, without modification, on a wide variety of
>>platforms.
>>
>>One is Fortran, with the Software Tools library.
>>The other is C.
>>
	...
> There is no compatible C compiler for UNIX and VAX/VMS, and there can't be
> because there are too many fundamental differences between these operating
> systems.
	...
> Exercise for the reader:  write a *portable* program in any language which
> takes a file name as its parameter and returns the modification or creation
> date and time of that file.  Don't use any conditional compilation.
> 
> Aid.

	I am becoming very tired of the pedantic declarations of C's
tremendous advantage of being so portable.  I know I can write COBOL code
which will not only compile, but also *execute correctly*, on any computer
with an ANSI COBOL compiler without any source code modifications, except
for one "include" file (for the ENVIRONMENT DIVISION).  On the other hand,
COBOL programs cannot do many of the things C does so well.

	Each language has its advantages and disadvantages, and portability
is relatively low on the list of both.  To write batch oriented commercial
applications on large mini or mainframe computers I will chose COBOL
every time.  To develop operating software on micro and mini's C is the
best choice by far, over any other language.  C++ for graphical systems
and major utility applications, etc.  Each in its own place.

---
On a clear disk you can seek forever.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Lawrence        |  alawrenc@sobmips.sobeco.UUCP
Informaticien Conseil  |  {attcan,mcgill-vision}!sobeco!sobmips!alawrenc
3462 Jeanne-Mance, #1  |
Montreal, Que  CANADA  |  Voice (514) 281-5196