Re: [9fans] SO for plan9?

[Steve Kilbane <steve@whitecrow.demon.co.uk>]

>
> > Libraries are about sharing functionality. Not code, and not
> > services, but functionality.
>
> How does plan9 solve the problem that for some functionality, it is
> much more efficient (or at least simpler) to manipulate directly the
> C/C++/whatever data structures instead of having to write/read plan9
> files and convert the data gathered there? Does one, in such cases,
> write a wrapper library or do plan9 programs take a different route?

Like I said, each problem is solved on its individual merits, but
with a view that encompasses the whole system, rather than just the
local problem. One is unlikely to produce a file server to offer trig
functionality. Consider the difference between command-line option
parsing and making a network connection. Both are done by many programs.
Both start as calls to common library functions. Option handling, as
I understand it, doesn't go further, while network connections call on
the services of kernel- and user-level file servers. Where to draw the
line is a matter of judgement, but Plan 9 has more flexibility that
Unix does in the matter.

Efficiency is one thing, but simplicity is something else. If all the
application program does is a call a function, what does it care whether
the underlying implementation does everything in-process, or uses a
file server?

steve