John R. Hogerhuis wrote:
On Fri, 2005-10-14 at 23:28 -0700, Zane H. Healy
wrote:
Actually I think having the hardware around to run
it isn't simply an
option, it's a requirement. Once it's certified, you can't easily
substitute out different hardware.
To really future-proof, it would be a good idea to find a good, portable
emulator for the processor in question and bundle it with the
application source code.
Personally, I think it's a better plan to pick a language that is
supported on a) as many current industry platforms as possible and b) on
one or more platforms that's likely to be around for many years.
Point a) probably drastically reduces the number of options. Point b)
really boils down to a PC running Windows / Linux / *BSD I would expect.
Taking that approach you can be as sure as you're able that either the
hardware/OS will be around in 30 years, or an emulator will exist for
that hardware/OS combination. (eg. I can see Wine under Linux out-living
current flavours of Windows by many years)
Bundling the language spec along with the source code would seem to be a
good idea.
Steering clear of a GUI to the app seems sensible to me (as I said
elsewhere) - but making the app able to have the current favourite GUI
stuck on top of it easily (whether that's native GUI controls,
character-based, web-based, or whatever). Keep it simple and all that,
make the app able to do what it needs to do well and avoid extra
'frills' on top.
cheers
Jules