From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id f2d7c006 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 23:20:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 6426D9BFC5; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:20:14 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E13539BD9B; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:19:44 +1000 (AEST) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id CBC689BD9B; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:19:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail.bitblocks.com (ns1.bitblocks.com [173.228.5.8]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 432169BD84 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 09:19:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from bitblocks.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.bitblocks.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF38A156E40C; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:19:19 -0700 (PDT) To: Larry McVoy In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 24 Jun 2019 21:18:06 -0700." <20190625041806.GL7655@mcvoy.com> References: <8D0B5B0D-9956-47D7-8D36-1729BB1E1DA9@eschatologist.net> <5df8c6f6-2768-4bfb-9c47-3345098078a7@PU1APC01FT048.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <20190625000630.GA7655@mcvoy.com> <20190625003120.GA28608@mit.edu> <20190625004523.GB7655@mcvoy.com> <20190625005528.GA11929@wopr> <20190625041806.GL7655@mcvoy.com> Comments: In-reply-to Larry McVoy message dated "Mon, 24 Jun 2019 21:18:06 -0700." From: Bakul Shah MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <51493.1561591159.1@bitblocks.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 16:19:19 -0700 Message-Id: <20190626231926.EF38A156E40C@mail.bitblocks.com> Subject: [TUHS] Craft vs Research (Re: CMU Mach sources? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" On Mon, 24 Jun 2019 21:18:06 -0700 Larry McVoy wrote: > > It's not about money. It's about caring about your craft. I cared, > the people I have worked with in industry cared, if they didn't I > left. > > The point I was trying to make was that you can be a student and still > be a pro. Or not. The pros care about their craft. The Mach people, > in my you-get-what-you-paid-for opinion, were not pros. They got a > lot done in a sloppy way and they left a mess. > > I don't know how to say it more clearly, there are plenty examples of > students that wrote clean code. Mach was cool, clean code it was not. I beg to differ with Larry. Research is basically directed exploration. You may have a vague idea about what you're seeking or you may decide to pursue something you stumbled upon. But you are mainly hacking a path through the jungle as it were. In my view it is much too early to build permanent roads (i.e. write "production quality code") during exploration. And if you spend time building roads, you are likely going to slow down or are already stuck and simply using road building to procrastinate! Craft certainly counts but it is not all important. You should just build *what you absolutely need* and do so as simply as possible and keep moving. In fact, the more permanent structures you build, the more afraid you will be to throw away bad bits and pieces if you have to change direction! It doesn't make sense to expect such exploratory code to work well in production. It is not going to be rock solid, it won't take care of corner cases, it will have lousy error recovery, if any, it may not have some necessary features and it may not scale well.