|[7 earlier articles]|
|Re: HLL design firstname.lastname@example.org (fermineutron) (2006-10-21)|
|Re: HLL design email@example.com (Daniel C. Wang) (2006-10-24)|
|Re: HLL design firstname.lastname@example.org (email@example.com) (2006-10-24)|
|Re: HLL design firstname.lastname@example.org (Bjarke Walling) (2006-10-24)|
|Re: HLL design email@example.com (DavidM) (2006-10-24)|
|Re: HLL design DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-10-26)|
|Re: HLL design firstname.lastname@example.org (Bjarke Walling) (2006-10-28)|
|From:||"Bjarke Walling" <email@example.com>|
|Date:||28 Oct 2006 01:25:36 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||28 Oct 2006 01:25:36 EDT|
Hans-Peter Diettrich skrev:
> Bjarke Walling wrote:
> > * My language is more or less independant of the architecture and
> > platform if I stick to the C standard. Ie. you can use another C
> > compiler to compile for your specific platform.
> More less, I think. If your language allows for filehandling and other
> OS specific features, your libraries are more important than the
> compiler, with regards to portability.
Yes, you are right. I try to solve this another way, but regarding the
question of fermineutron the libraries are more important to
- Bjarke Walling
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.