3 ms·
Are POSIX utilities even portable? They tend to have poor windows support. And they also tend to target C, which has a high ceiling for portability, but also a
by nicoburns 2y ago
Are POSIX utilities even portable? They tend to have poor windows support. And they also tend to target C, which has a high ceiling for portability, but also a high bar for making things portable (whereas more modern languages are often just portable by default).
My take on POSIX utilities would be only to use them on Linux platforms where they effectively form a "native" part of the platform.
- gavinhoward 2y agoI was mostly speaking about POSIX, since that was the focus of GGP. Yes, you should only use them on POSIX. My utility does build natively on Windows, though.
- chasil 2y agoThe NT kernel was created with a POSIX layer (along with os/2). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_POSIX_subsystem Microsoft had previously been the largest AT&T UNIX licensee with Xenix sales on the TRS-80 model 2, so they were familiar with the need.
- kelnos 2y ago> They tend to have poor windows support Does Windows claim POSIX compatibility these days? I didn't think so? I remember NT's old POSIX subsystem, but is that even a thing anymore? > My take on POSIX utilities would be only to use them on Linux platforms I mean, only use them on POSIX-compliant systems. Linux is just one of them. At the risk of sounding childishly derisive, when someone is talking about "portability", I think they're generally not bothering to include Windows in the mix, as Windows doesn't really share all that much of a common denominator with much else.