From: Norman Wilson <norman@oclsc.org>
To: tuhs@tuhs.org
Subject: Re: [TUHS] [OT] Re: earliest Unix roff
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 17:19:56 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1568927999.21637.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org> (raw)
Arthur Krewat:
Which is better, creating a whole new binary to put in /usr/bin to do a
single task, or add a flag to cat?
Which is better, a proliferation of binaries w/standalone source code,
or a single code tree that can handle slightly different tasks and save
space?
======
Which is simpler to write correctly, to debug, and to maintain:
a simple program that does a single task, or a huge single program
with lots of tasks mashed together?
Which is easier to understand and use, individual programs each
with a few options specialized to a particular task, or a monolith
with many more options some of which apply only to one task or
another, others to all?
What are you trying to optimize for? The speed with which
programmers can churn out yet another featureful utility full
of bugs and corner cases, or the ease with which the end-user
can figure out what tool to use and how to use it?
Norman Wilson
Toronto ON
next reply other threads:[~2019-09-19 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-09-19 21:19 Norman Wilson [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-09-19 18:50 Norman Wilson
2019-09-19 19:00 ` Nemo Nusquam
2019-09-19 20:18 ` Larry McVoy
2019-09-19 20:33 ` Arthur Krewat
2019-09-19 20:39 ` Jon Steinhart
2019-09-19 21:46 ` Steve Nickolas
2019-09-19 21:51 ` Larry McVoy
2019-09-19 22:44 ` Rob Pike
2019-09-16 14:51 [TUHS] " Larry McVoy
2019-09-16 14:57 ` Clem Cole
2019-09-16 15:14 ` Richard Salz
2019-09-16 16:10 ` Larry McVoy
2019-09-16 16:16 ` Jon Steinhart
2019-09-16 16:26 ` Larry McVoy
2019-09-16 16:31 ` Richard Salz
2019-09-16 16:45 ` Larry McVoy
2019-09-16 17:19 ` KatolaZ
2019-09-16 17:37 ` Jon Steinhart
2019-09-16 18:09 ` [TUHS] [OT] " KatolaZ
2019-09-16 18:19 ` Jon Steinhart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1568927999.21637.for-standards-violators@oclsc.org \
--to=norman@oclsc.org \
--cc=tuhs@tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).