/tech/ - Technology★

stupid bait...

>If developers are so smart

They often aren't

>why can't they make portable software

There's already portable software, just use a portable lib/framework, for example gnulib or electron, shit sorry for that, I couldn't think of anything better

>Linux

Linux is just a kernel, GNU/Linux is the system.

https://www.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-linux-faq.html

And finally we don't need to have proprietary botnet 'apps' on GNU/Linux and if Windows fags want free software, they can switch anytime.

There's no reason to, since Windows is garbage that nobody should still be using in '(CURRENT YEAR)

>>1067799

Then why is there no AutoCAD on GNU/Linux? No FL Studio on GNU/Linux?

>>1067803

This has nothing to do with your original question. The developers of AutoCAD and FL Studio don't care about portability. I see plenty of cross platform programs using wxWidgets, QT, and GTK.

>kyspox

thanks

There is no such thing as portable software. The only way to write once and run everywhere is to have a layer of abstraction in-between your code and the systems. This can be done at the language level (e.g. a compiler translates abstract C code into machine-specific machine code), by having the program run on a VM (e.g. Java or Python), or by inserting a layer of abstraction through a library that smooths over the differences (e.g. SDL for hardware access or Qt for GUIs). But all these approaches do is just delegate the task of taking care of the differences to another person.

>>1067803

Because the developers don't want it to be. Maybe they just don't care. Maybe they have made so many assumptions about the underlying system that it would be a nightmare for them to isolate all the connections.

Whenever you make an assumption about the underlying system you lose portability. For example, calling 'read()' even once in a C program makes your program unportable to anything that's not POSIX. If you wanted to compile it on Windows you would have to insert an extra abstraction like Cygwin

>>1067803

That's is their complete intention. They don't want it there.