--------------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;
 namenmeb.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filenamenmeb.vcf"

YmVnaW46dmNhcmQNCmZuOk0uIEVkd2FyZCAoRWQpIEJvcmFza3kNCm46O00uIEVkd2FyZCAo
RWQpIEJvcmFza3kNCmVtYWlsO2ludGVybmV0OnpubWViQGNlc21haWwubmV0DQp4LW1vemls
bGEtaHRtbDpGQUxTRQ0KdmVyc2lvbjoyLjENCmVuZDp2Y2FyZA0KDQo--------------010605050606060006090305--