Mail Archives: djgpp/1997/05/29/08:19:07
On Mon, 26 May 1997 22:11:26 GMT, pb AT excelsior DOT xs4all DOT nl DOT REMOVE-THIS
(Marc van den Dikkenberg) wrote:
>On Mon, 26 May 1997 00:00:09 -0600, X-Bios <XBios AT hotmail DOT com> wrote:
>
>
>>(a different section)
>>The MS-DOS version has some 500, the Windows version about 800, the OS/2
>>version roughly 1000, and the UNIX version about 900 commands and
>>functions.
>>
>>I think that's ample proof for GFA's OS/2 port.
>
>I think that's it's also safe say that if HALF the commands between two
>versions are missing, it's poorly portable, at best.
>--
No, it says that commands that are not typically portable are not
portable, if you look closely you will see that DOS and windows are
different. To knock GFA dos because it cannot do everything that
windows can do is silly. Portability is achieved two different ways...
1. Make the language so simple that the user cannot use OS calls.
ofcourse, you can't have graphics because some systems do not have
that ability, your only sound command can be BEEP, etc, etc.
2. Make "basic" commands as portable as possible, but add "balls" to
each system. Let the user use his skills to write code that is
portable. I have/do do it. You should too. If you code in C, ASM or
Basic keep your code portable as possible one day when your thousands
of lines of code are obsolete you will remember me!
>Marc van den Dikkenberg
>-----------------------
>The PowerBasic Archives
>http://pitel-lnx.ibk.fnt.hvu.nl/~excel/pb.html
- Raw text -