Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [7 earlier articles] |
| Re: HLL design free4trample@yahoo.com (fermineutron) (2006-10-21) |
| Re: HLL design danwang74@gmail.com (Daniel C. Wang) (2006-10-24) |
| Re: HLL design idknow@gmail.com (idknow@gmail.com) (2006-10-24) |
| Re: HLL design bjarke.walling@gmail.com (Bjarke Walling) (2006-10-24) |
| Re: HLL design amedlock@gmail.com (DavidM) (2006-10-24) |
| Re: HLL design DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-10-26) |
| Re: HLL design bjarke.walling@gmail.com (Bjarke Walling) (2006-10-28) |
| From: | "Bjarke Walling" <bjarke.walling@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 28 Oct 2006 01:25:36 -0400 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 06-10-08006-10-104 06-10-111 |
| Keywords: | design |
| 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
portability.
- Bjarke Walling
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.