From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinO4jAj+T6A31r+fhWHoF6Nq6G=JLQQZuOysjae@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d04fb692-689e-4380-8ea8-1c5588e80b43@c16g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>
	<AANLkTinyNcZWDpbpEH+96vr2PUJXeLdYeQmRshNrS2ai@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=UnHtt+ANPB9A_a6T6snK15S4VbtiL98BTeLYX@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimn1x0H9kiRu+fo7BByW7nLN7OJrewF5rv6gwF5@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinO4jAj+T6A31r+fhWHoF6Nq6G=JLQQZuOysjae@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 07:45:23 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimGmndWtUuzTSMCjgtNWkEQ30mvN3-fOMHavfdr@mail.gmail.com>
From: ron minnich <rminnich@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [9fans] So, why Plan 9?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 617801aa-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

getting it right:

- less code in plan 9 than in most configure scripts (hard to believe but true)
- plan 9 memory management code is 1 file, linux is 55
- almost no assembly in plan 9 ; # lines  assembly is GROWING in linux
- growth of linux code size is exponential (this is part of the
getting it right issue)

it's always good to have a system that gets closer to getting it right
around, as a reminder if nothing else.

ron