Missing version(Unix). Again.

[James Dunne]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Anders F Björklund wrote:
>  >
> 
>> I'm not really sure why Ares changed the name from Unix to Posix,
>> surely there was a good reason for doing it differently from GDC ?
>> "Unix", see http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D.gnu/1212
>> (hope it doesn't mean that we need *three* versions, in the above)
> 
> 
> "POSIX" is an API spec, while "UNIX" is merely a generic term for some 
> systems that implement that spec.  I thought it made more sense to say 
> whether your OS supported the API and leave OS-specific stuff to what's 
> actually OS-specific (in sys/*).  Admittedly, sys/linux/c still contains 
> a bunch of stuff that's actually a part of POSIX, but I'm trying to 
> phase it out as it's implemented in the POSIX headers.
> 
> 
> Sean

POSIX is a very loosely defined spec.  It would be difficult to identify 
the OSes that claim to be POSIX-compliant that implement radically 
different behavior.  This is why there are so many POSIX-compliant OSes, 
NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBDS, Linux, Solaris, etc.  Each one of them takes a 
different stance on how the spec should be implemented, the corner 
cases, etc.  I'm no expert in such things, but it poses a difficult 
problem for application developers.

-- 
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/MU/S d-pu s:+ a-->? C++++$ UL+++ P--- L+++ !E W-- N++ o? K? w--- O 
M--@ V? PS PE Y+ PGP- t+ 5 X+ !R tv-->!tv b- DI++(+) D++ G e++>e 
h>--->++ r+++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

James Dunne