On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Anthony Sorace <anothy@gmail.com> wrote:

> erik wrote:
>
> > it's interesting to compare this with the sleezy not-paths
> > that e.g. gnome programs can take, like uris.  great as long
> > as long as you don't care to use anything but gnome tools.
>
> i had that debate with a kde-loving linux admin. i had been explaining
> why plan 9 was interesting or significant, and he countered with the
> kde example. i was marginally impressed by the number of protocols
> they handled, but when i asked how you'd use it with cat and friends,
> he said "no, just use kate".
>
> i reeled, stuttered, tried to get out something that sounded like
> "layering violation", and ran away. it wasn't even a cost/benefit
> argument; there wasn't any recognition of the costs.
>
> Right but when you consider KDE runs on windows, then it's not as much of a
layering violation... no more than Java is I guess anyway.
The layering violation that I usually point at is the /dev/tcp created by
the bash shell :-).