--------------010605050606060006090305 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ara.t.howard wrote: > > On Jul 10, 2008, at 11:57 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > >> I'm not sure C++ is any less portable than C, especially if you >> consider the widespread use of the Gnu Compiler Collection. > > > my experience is that it really is. a few years back a group i worked > for moved from c++ to java for one reason: portability. the code they > wrote needed to run on machines all over the world and, despite the fact > that most pcs have good compilers there are still a lot of servers and > mainframes out there running scientific systems which do not. it > actually came as a surprise to me at the time. Java is also easier to read and write than C++ -- a *lot* easier. And I'll bet a definition of a brass monkey that there were two camps. One wanted to write C++ because it was faster than Java and the other wanted to write Java because it was easier to read and write and more portable. :) In the case of Windows PCs / Servers, there are definitely some "seams" in C/C++ relative to Unix and, if it matters, VMS. :) -- M. Edward (Ed) Borasky http://ruby-perspectives.blogspot.com/ "A mathematician is a machine for turning coffee into theorems." -- Alfréd Rényi via Paul Erds --------------010605050606060006090305 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8; name nmeb.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename nmeb.vcf" YmVnaW46dmNhcmQNCmZuOk0uIEVkd2FyZCAoRWQpIEJvcmFza3kNCm46O00uIEVkd2FyZCAo RWQpIEJvcmFza3kNCmVtYWlsO2ludGVybmV0OnpubWViQGNlc21haWwubmV0DQp4LW1vemls bGEtaHRtbDpGQUxTRQ0KdmVyc2lvbjoyLjENCmVuZDp2Y2FyZA0KDQo--------------010605050606060006090305--