Talk:Application binary interface

message: there is a lack of pointers to many of existing ABIs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.88.50.86 (talk) 11:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No pointers to many existing ABIs 

message: linux standard base is really nothing to do with ABI compatibility.  needs removed but some research around ABI compatability to replace the current, erroneous statement would be good  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.202.40 (talk) 22:35, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  linux standard base 

message: the following statement
There have been several attempts to standardise the ABI such that software vendors may distribute one binary application for all these systems, however to date, none of these have met with much success.
requires some reference or qualification  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.204.202.40 (talk) 22:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  statement about standardisation of ABI in Unices 

message: I see a few glaring issues with this article.
#I don't see any clear explanation of the "binary" nature of the ABI
#I don't see any discussion of what the most common ABIs are
#I only see one clear example: iBCS
#I don't see any discussion of virtual machines, and whether or not bytecode or a VM runtime would be considered an ABI  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.139.254.117 (talk) 00:57, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I've found another issue. There is no real discussion of naming concerns within ABIs, in particular, no discussion of the role of symbols.  I've added a couple links, but can't do much more. 75.139.254.117 (talk) 09:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Application binary interface. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070121183413/http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS9048137234.html to http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS9048137234.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070331193917/http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5920399313.html to http://linuxdevices.com/articles/AT5920399313.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080528070803/http://www.x86-64.org/documentation.html to http://www.x86-64.org/documentation.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: --117.195.63.111 (talk) 12:47, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: System Binary Interface, but what is it? --117.195.63.111 (talk) 12:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's an SBI? 

message: An Application Program Interface is an abstract view of the system internals, on the other hand an Application Binary Interface is the standardized systems concrete data structures implementation. 
Does an ABI also standardize how procedures should be implemented? for example to be or not re-entrant code or o be forced to use some global variables.
What does it mean abstract vs. concrete? 
An abstract data type is accessed through function prototypes independent of the data representation chosen to implement the data type. 
For example: a stack of T type objects, is defined and also accessed via its constructors and selectors. 
TStack push(T x, TStack s)
TStack empty
could be a prototype for the constructors push and empty.
T top(TStack s)
must correspond to the specification  top(push(x,s))=x and top(empty)=Error
TStack pop(TStack s)
must correspond to the specification  pop(push(x,s))=s and pop(empty)=Error
Bool isempty(TStack s)
must correspond to the specification  isempty(push(x,s))=False and 
isempty(empty)=True.
The concrete implementation may define the TStack data type with an array, or a list (is isomorphic to a list). 
The API hides the actual representation (an array, list, ...)
The ABI shows the actual representation.
If this is correct, could someone please work the above explanation apporting more details to what does an what doesn't comprise the ABI, to have a more concise explanation of ABI in the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.124.191.35 (talk) 14:33, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  If this concise explanation of API vs. ABI is correct, can be a better way to explain what an ABI is