Casper.Dik at sun.com wrote:
> Ah, that's kinda OK then, except for the problem of code duplication.
>
> Is there any particular reason why ksh needs to use ast stdio?
I don't know why ksh needs to do this but I know why my code uses
private implementations of things that should be in libc: It is
to prevent portable code from becoming unreadable and unmaintainable.
There are many similar issues.
Sometimes you need to port to platforms that are not POSIX enough.
Sometimes the Platforms are not implementing a recent enough POSIX
standard.
Some applications (like e.g. make) do not have enough features in the
POSIX variant to allow a portable compilation of your application.
For reasons like this, people who write highly portable software all do
similar but not identical things. Look e.g. at the fact that the there
are three portable "make" implementations (gmake, smake, nmake) that are done
just because it massively reduces the amount of maintenance/porting effort.
So in case you are trying to argue with putative Sun ARC case discussions,
think about the background and you may find that you either need to allow
portable application to duplicate the code that is needed to make the portable
application easier to port or you need to duplicate the rest of the code for
portable applcations in OpenSolaris just because you won't allow portable
application to follow the rules for portable appliations.
J?rg
--
EMail:joerg at schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J?rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js at cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling at fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
