If I am in a
position of having to use such a machine, then how
satisfied am I likely to be with software written on a better
machine, and NEVER REALLY TESTED on a machine like mine?
Now now. Just because it was written on a beefier machine doesn't mean
it wasn't tested on its target environment. That 8051 code was tested
on 8051s, not on the machine I wrote it on. The Android code was
tested on the target hardware.
I think the important bit is 'NEVER REALLY TESTED...' No sane person
would attempt to ru na PCI develompent system on a PIC. And you probably
do want a reasoablly fast machie to run compilers, etc (yes, I can
rememebr all-night complies...)
But the testing should be done either on the target hardware if it's
well-defined (such on the microcontroller that is to be used) or on a
varietyy of machines, including oens iwth more modest speifications if,
say, it's tp run on a PC. You ma even find some bougs that way... One
infamous editors used ^J for 'justify'. Which menat an extra newline
keypress whrn starting it up, if read before the TTY was switched to raw
mode, would be read ^M ^J and would justify the file you were attmpting
to edit. On a fast machien there was little chance of this happening, on
a slow machine it was common.
-tony