l i n u x - u s e r s - g r o u p - o f - d a v i s
L U G O D
 
Next Meeting:
October 7: Social gathering
Next Installfest:
TBD
Latest News:
Aug. 18: Discounts to "Velocity" in NY; come to tonight's "Photography" talk
Page last updated:
2002 Jun 06 16:03

The following is an archive of a post made to our 'vox mailing list' by one of its subscribers.

Report this post as spam:

(Enter your email address)
Re: [vox] Gopher: New use for old software.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [vox] Gopher: New use for old software.



On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 05:23:22PM -0700, Mark K. Kim wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, nbs wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 02:09:36PM -0700, Mark K. Kim wrote:
> > >
> > > I guess it depends on what "portable" means.  Is a language portable if
> > > programs *can* be made portable, or if it *forces* programs to be
> > > portable?
> >
> >
> > If the former, then even BASIC is portable :)
> >
> >   PRINT "HELLO"
> [Insert Beaker here :]
> > But - that first 'program' at the top is portable! ;)
> 
> Are you sure?  I think you need a number in the front:
> 
>    10 PRINT "HELLO"

Well, actually - Some BASICs include an editor, rather than have
an interpreter only (where you must do line numbers). :)

Just a plain "PRINT "HELLO"", while I guess not technically a
_program_ in most BASICs, is still valid. ;^)


> Is PERL, an interpreted language like BASIC, portable?

Depends on if you use any of the calls that let the underlying platform
'bubble through' I guess. :)


> Are SDL programs, compiled using C or C++, portable?

See above.  Not if you do:   system("format c:");   ;)


I think, much like the line between Operating Systems, Interfaces and
Applications is getting very very fuzzy, whether or not a particular
language is portable is (and really always has been) a matter of whether
the language _forces_ you to be portable.  (e.g., NO way of doing a
"system()" or a "POKE")


<snip>
> PS: FYI, the way QuickBASIC "compiled" BASIC programs was to make P-CODE
> out of BASIC program, then stick it at the end of a precompiled
> executable. At runtime, the precompiled executable would read the P-CODE
> and run it piece-by-piece.  So basically it was interpreting your BASIC
> code even if you "compiled" it.  It was rediculously lazy of Microsoft...

Fairly typical, I think.  TurboBASIC XL on the Atari can be "compiled,"
but to run it, you need to run a "runtime."  I'm guessing that the
'compiled' code is much like P-CODE, although it COULD theoretically
be straight 6502 CPU code - the runtime only needed for "library calls"
like "PRINT", "OPEN", "CLOSE", etc.

-bill!
_______________________________________________
vox mailing list
vox@lists.lugod.org
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox



LinkedIn
LUGOD Group on LinkedIn
Sign up for LUGOD event announcements
Your email address:
facebook
LUGOD Group on Facebook
'Like' LUGOD on Facebook:

Hosting provided by:
Sunset Systems
Sunset Systems offers preconfigured Linux systems, remote system administration and custom software development.

LUGOD: Linux Users' Group of Davis
PO Box 2082, Davis, CA 95617
Contact Us

LUGOD is a 501(c)7 non-profit organization
based in Davis, California
and serving the Sacramento area.
"Linux" is a trademark of Linus Torvalds.

Sponsored in part by:
O'Reilly and Associates
For numerous book donations.