On 6/5/23 18:55, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 5 Jun 2023 16:55:45 -0400, Rick Troth wrote:
Porting applications to Linux-s390x has never been particularly difficult.
The biggest challenge has always been such things as endianness.
How serious is that? It has caused me problems only with careless
type-punning.
I would not be surprised if you're a more disciplined programmer than
many FLOSS volunteers.
...
Porting to USS has (at least) two significant hurdles: EBCDIC
How much is that mitigated by Enhanced ASCII? What residual
problems remain? Unsupported library functions?
Linguistics, including graphemes, have been a problem since the Tower of
Babel.
Sometimes that's a GOOD thing, but it *is* a thing.
... and a
different system interface. Being Unix certified doesn't really help the
*porting* process.
Aren't the C and system() interfaces the same? What problems remain?
Short answer: no.
Have you never re-compiled flawless C source from one Unix (e.g. AIX) on
another Unix (e.g. HP-UX)?
Now you've done and got me started!
So much time and effort went into the Gnu autoconf/automake tools, but
that wasn't good enough so KitWare re-invented *that* wheel, stomping on
the logic others have tried to provide.
If you're trying to say "it's not really that difficult", then I agree.
But we're up against an innumerable horde of developers content with
"good enough", under management focused on "good enough", and funded by
investors who just want "good enough", though "good enough" really isn't
... if your goal is multi-platform efficacy.
Multi-platform costs. It only costs discipline, but it does cost. With
USS, you need even more discipline. (And that's *not* a slam on USS.)
-- R; <><
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
