ISO: help porting C code to 64 bit linux platform - Linux

This is a discussion on ISO: help porting C code to 64 bit linux platform - Linux ; On a sunny day (Sun, 14 Jan 2007 18:30:28 +0000) it happened =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= wrote in : >Joe Pfeiffer writes: > >> Jan Panteltje writes: >>> >>> Well honestly, this afternoon I have been re-writing that piece of >>> wave processing ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 42 of 42

Thread: ISO: help porting C code to 64 bit linux platform

  1. Re: ISO: help porting C code to 64 bit linux platform

    On a sunny day (Sun, 14 Jan 2007 18:30:28 +0000) it happened
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?= wrote in
    :

    >Joe Pfeiffer writes:
    >
    >> Jan Panteltje writes:
    >>>
    >>> Well honestly, this afternoon I have been re-writing that piece of
    >>> wave processing stuff, and what you wind up with is something like this:
    >>>
    >>> uint8_t *buffer[44];// wave header is always 44 bytes

    >>
    >> Are you sure you didn't mean
    >>
    >> uint8_t buffer[44];// wave header is always 44 bytes
    >>
    >> (no asterisk)?

    >
    >That's probably what he meant. The comment about 44 bytes is a lie
    >too. There are *many* MS WAV files with longer headers.


    Well, these may exist, but I do not support these :-)
    Most wavefiles made with Linux have 44 byte headers.


  2. Re: ISO: help porting C code to 64 bit linux platform

    Jan Panteltje writes:
    > >>
    > >> The real truth about C is that is is _not_ portable :-)

    > >
    > >The real truth is that no language will ever be portable; your code
    > >has to be portable.




    > As to your last remark:
    > It is not possible to write 100 % portable code (in C or any language).


    True -- you can only do your best to guess what some future machine
    will do, and try to make it as bulletproof as possibe.

    > If at all possible I write in the simplest subset of C, I came from C/80,
    > and C/80 programs compile even today.
    > But there is no way I can take a gcc program and use it with C/80, even
    > just because there is no libc.
    > Many smaller micros do not have libc, and severe restrictions on
    > memory,


    You can use gcc without linking to libc -- and there is a version of
    gcc for quite a few smaller micros (I've played with the Freescale
    HC11 port a little bit).

    > maybe have a different architecture, IO and special hardware considerations.
    > If you want to use these (and somebody mentioned DSP too), you will have to
    > adapt, to make best use of the provided hardware facilities.


    That's true.



    > Anyways I added some new features to my program today, do you want to be
    > mentioned as responsible for the changes in reading in the structures?
    > ;-)


    Then I might get those thousands of emails....
    --
    Joseph J. Pfeiffer, Jr., Ph.D. Phone -- (505) 646-1605
    Department of Computer Science FAX -- (505) 646-1002
    New Mexico State University http://www.cs.nmsu.edu/~pfeiffer

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3