Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 8th Mar 2006 23:20 UTC, submitted by anonymous
"Technology professionals have loosely used the term 'UNIX' since the first person had to explain the difference between the Berkeley and AT&T flavors, so it's not surprising to find as many UNIX standards as there are versions of the operating system. Peter Seebach wades through the wellspring of UNIX standards and sorts them out for you, concluding that the rumors of the death of UNIX are (as usual) greatly exaggerated."
Thread beginning with comment 102797
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-15
Of course, I'm talking about compiled code. Source might need some work because the Microsoft C/C++ compiler improved alot in the past years. Just like any compilers.
Talk about spin... "Might" need some work? No, it will. And it will need work not because the compiler has gotten so much better, but because things have CHANGED.
You windows fans are sounding like the Linux fans. The article is ABOUT UNIX. He barely mentions Linux. He barely mentions Windows. Get back in your cages.
Member since:
2005-07-08
Indeed, the author doesn't know .... about how the Windows internals work.
Like some people said, if 15 years ago, you wrote a proper Win16 program, using documented api behaviors, it will still work PERFECTLY today. I did it myself.
Of course, I'm talking about compiled code. Source might need some work because the Microsoft C/C++ compiler improved alot in the past years. Just like any compilers.
However, it's true that some code won't work today, mostly very old DOS code. Why? ask Intel. Hopefully, most 386+ will work natively while older code might be emulated perfectly if the code didn't rely on dirty tricks.