Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 9th Sep 2012 22:58 UTC
Permalink for comment 535112
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-02-19
And what system interface should we write this portable code against? A lot of the APIs present in POSIX are pretty lean and pretty basic; the POSIX file API has, what, eleven major entry points*? You're either saying that people shouldn't open files, handle strings or allocate memory in "portable code", or you're saying that there's some smaller, simpler, more portable API than POSIX that we should be using.
* fopen, fclose, fread, fwrite, fprintf, fscanf, fgets, fgetc, fputc, ftell, fseek; yes, there are obviously more, but those eleven will cover most of your common desktop use-cases.
Edit: I is not can kount.
Edited 2012-09-14 21:23 UTC