Why is C++ less portable than C? In my experience, non-portable code happens when the interaction with the OS is not well isolated. Since the major OS interfaces are C header files, I don't see why C++ makes it any worse.
Re:The Art of Assembly Language (1996)
by nthompson on Wednesday April 04, 2018 @04:48AM
(#16753097)
I should've clarified: I meant portability of code so that is can be compiled by multiple compilers, VS, clang, gcc. The feature set for C++ is so vast that it's almost certain that you'll write code on for one compiler that doesn't compile on another.
https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Bit-Assembly-Programming...
I figured out how to write some basic stuff, then I learned to use perf to performance tune. Being able to read a little assembly was a revolution for me.
I also chuckled about how C is non-portable; omg C++ is so much worse. In some sense, x86 asm is more portable than just about anything now, sure you can't run it on ARM, but your C++ code won't compile on ARM either and you'll be in #ifdef hell for two weeks to get it there, at which point you'll give up.