Should Rule 11 include statements about hardware and OS (SUS)?

[SirWumpus]

The Rules make no clear statement concerning hardware (CPU) or OS restrictions. The Guidelines do make a comment about:

We tend to DISLIKE programs that:

• are very hardware specific
• are very OS version specific (index(3)/strchr(3) differences are OK, but sockets/streams specific code is likely not to be)
• dump core or have compiler warnings (it is OK only if you warn us in your remarks.md file)
• won’t compile or run in a Single UNIX Specification environment
• depend on a utility or application not normally found in systems that conform to the Single UNIX pecification

Should some of that be more formally stated in the Rules. Rule 11 comes closest IMO, but maybe some other would be better suited.

See also Discord discussion and following comments.

[lcn2]

REQUEST

Statements about hardware and OS seem to be best addressed in the IOCCC Guidelines instead of a rule.

And even though @SirWumpus points out the relevant IOCCC Guidelines, we believe that the text could be improved.

Therefore, we ask that the title of this discussion be changed to something like:

Improve about hardware and OS (SUS)?

We invite a discussion about what such improved IOCCC Guidelines text should be added and/or improved.

[lcn2]

Rule 11 is now different, and improved IOCCC Guidelines will be re-written to include "hardware and OS (SUS)" stuff.