On Tuesday, 5 June 2012 at 15:48:07 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Tuesday, June 05, 2012 19:34:38 Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> If it was not for the damned Windows, there would be a single
> universal operating system interface for all operating
> systems.
If POSIX standardization was ever successful. If all you need
is covered
by oldish Unix interface, if ... And there is ton of small
details that
try to stub you in the eye while porting from say Linux to OS
X.
When writing std.datetime, I was shocked to find out that Mac
OS X doesn't have
the librt functions in spite of the fact that they're POSIX. My
guess is that
they're from some version of POSIX that Mac OS X doesn't
support, but
regardless, the fact that something is POSIX doesn't seem to
actually
guarantee much. It puts you in the general ballpark of your
stuff working if
it's using POSIX stuff, but you have to make it sure (and
potentially tweak)
everything that you do which relies on POSIX functionality for
each OS to make
sure that it functions correctly. All you have to do is go
through druntime
and see all of the differences between each of the POSIX
systems to see how
much they vary, in spite of the fact that they're all
supposedly following the
POSIX standard.
- Jonathan M Davis
This is the hard reality of UNIX systems, that many aren't aware
of
because they only know one specific system.
Long time ago, 1999-2003, I had my share of pain supporting
server applications across Aix, HP-UX, Solaris, Linux, BSD
besides Windows.
The one that gave us more headaches was HP-UX, due to the archaic
compiler available on the system and the 32-64 bit transition
happening on those days.
--
Paulo
