From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:10:47 MDT."
	<14ec7b180904091610y3fd8abdao1ebca4d19d77246a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <14ec7b180904091059i6396102fn483cd7ec59dd65de@mail.gmail.com>
	<179a609122ce2818022296098855f41c@quintile.net>
	<14ec7b180904091430r34d17a0bxc8072f4f2ede1443@mail.gmail.com>
	<14ec7b180904091431x1c775dfbke9d7fea4c361718d@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090409230615.9F7785B12@mail.bitblocks.com>
	<14ec7b180904091610y3fd8abdao1ebca4d19d77246a@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bakul Shah <bakul+plan9@bitblocks.com>
Date: Thu,  9 Apr 2009 22:05:58 -0700
Message-Id: <20090410050558.AEF725B12@mail.bitblocks.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] extensions of "interest"
Topicbox-Message-UUID: d9322e2a-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

On Thu, 09 Apr 2009 17:10:47 MDT andrey mirtchovski <mirtchovski@gmail.com>  wrote:
> > Unfortunately we don't have exact analogs in s/w.  We can
> > only simplicate; we can't add lightness!
>
> but somehow we can add "weight". can't we? bash is perceivably
> "heavier" than rc, xml perceivably "heavier" than 9p... statlite()
> perceivably "heavier" than stat() :)

Yes of course.  But that is because they use a more
complicated design that results in use of more code.

What I meant is in a physical assembly you can carefully
hollow out a solid part or use a lighter material to get a
lighter part without changing its structural properties
(much) and no other parts or couplings have to be changed.

In a program one can use hand code asembly or inline code
instead of calling a function, or call a function instead of
RPC to a separate process and so on but in each case there is
a tighter coupling that reduces flexibility.

Design done by wizards have simpler and fewer parts -- they
are simply much better at design. They "simplicate".

But granted, the analogy is rather weak :-)