4 ms·
> "The ABI, object file format, etc. should be standardized as far as possible in order to allow the same code to be compatible with different operating systems
by ZenoArrow 11y ago
> "The ABI, object file format, etc. should be standardized as far as possible in order to allow the same code to be compatible with different operating systems and platforms. This would make it possible, for example, to use the same function libraries in different operating systems."
So what are we talking about here? Sounds like by standardising on a higher level of abstraction, you're free to make more changes at a lower level. What does that mean in practice? Do compilers target this standardised abstraction layer rather than machine code? How is this better than the JVM/CLR approach?
- andrewflnr 11y agoHe's talking about making the actual machine code standardized/compatible across OS's.
- qznc 11y agoThat is not a technical, but a social or economic problem though. How would you get Microsoft and Apple and Linux to use the same calling convention?
- andrewflnr 11y agoI was trying to answer a technical question; perhaps I misinterpreted it? Anyway, if you can get a new CPU architecture through at all, you can probably get new calling conventions at the same time. Make sure your reference C compiler generates compatible code on all platforms, or something.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- mchahn 11y ago> making the actual machine code standardized/compatible across OS's I can't think of any advantage to this. Compilers already abstract this away.