Re: [9fans] a bit OT, programming style question

[erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>]

On Thu Apr  9 10:48:08 EDT 2009, eris.discordia@gmail.com wrote:
> Most of it in the 19 lines for one TERMCAP variable. Strictly a relic of
> the past kept with all good intentions: backward compatibility, and heeding

[...]

> Quite a considerable portion of UNIX-like systems, FreeBSD in this case, is
> the way it is not because the developers are stupid, rather because they
> have a "constituency" to tend to. They aren't carefree researchers with
> high ambitions.

this is the "space-shuttle dichotomy."  it's a false one.  it's a continuum.
its ends are dangerous.

on the one hand, if you change things, the new things are likely
to be buggy.  on the space shuttle, this is bad.  people die.

on the other hand, systems are not perfect.  and if the problems
are not addressed, eventually the system will need to much fixing
and will be abandoned.

yet bringing a new system on line is an even bigger risk.  everything
is new simultaneously.

it is interesting to me that some software manages to run off both
ends of this continuum at the same time.  in linux your termcap
from 1981 will still work, but software written to access /sys last
year is likely out-of-date.

your insinuation that *bsd is a real serious system and plan 9 is
a research system doesn't make any historical sense to me.  they
both started as research systems.  i am not aware of any law that
prevents a system that started as a research project from becoming
a serious production system.

i know of many thousands of plan 9 systems in production right
now.

- erik