Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO, the main takeaway from the article isn't that "those 70's developers lacked imagination", but that UNIX is far from perfect. The author even states that UNIX was amazing when it came out, but that doesn't mean all its ideas make sense today.
"they lacked imagination and like, I feel that we, young people today, like, a new generation, could do better"
The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
471–480 of 616 posts
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#472Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem here is that most unix tools (ls being the exception) do double duty, they both emit output for other programs and output for the user. Which one you get and how the user output is presented being controlled by flags. If you want them to only emit data in a standardized format you are implicitly cutting out the user. Since direct use by a human is arguably the main use case, output formatting needs to be…
> most unix tools (ls being the exception) do double duty, they both emit output for other programs and output for the user. Which one you get and how the user output is presented being controlled by flags. Which is where they fundamentally break the principle of "doing one thing, and doing it well". Formatting output for user should be a separate step (even if implicitly handled by your shell).
unless the 'thing' here is "outputting information in the most generally usable way possible"
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#473Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bam-bam-bam-bam. Sorry can hear you over all the whitespace I have to type.
Every editor worth its salt does this for you. Maybe try upgrading from ed.
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#474That was a sad thing to read, the author is so clueless they don't even know when the reasons they imagine something might have been broken are wrong. Back when UNIX was born the character was a first class citizen in every computer on the planet, and many languages used it as part of their syntax. Static binaries were invented when Sun and Berkeley co-developed shared libraries and there needed to be binaries that y…
> It always amazed me when someone looks at computer systems of the 70's through the lens of "today's" technology and then projects a failure of imagination on the part of those engineers back in the 70's True enough, but as a younger programmer, I find it pretty reasonable to look back at computer systems of the 70s and wonder if we can do better today . I feel a little bit gross every time I have to write a bash sh…
As a relatively young programmer i look at the computer systems of the 70's and think to myself "what the fuck are programmers thinking when writing today's programs". I mean we got amazing tools and a plethora of amazing languages, an insane amount of memory and an idiotic amount of processing power, chips specialized for sound and even ones for visuals. And yet everything lags.
As for shell scripts, they are fine. Not that you have to use them, as you can use python, scheme, anything (even C with tcc).
As for XML... oh god.. it is the worst, the absolute worst, way to do config files. Jesus help, is it awful. Bad for the user, bad for the processor. Simple key–value pairs (as in "power_level: 9000") are good enough for almost all configuration. Hell even the INI format is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar better then XML (and YAML, JSON (although these are themselves better then XML)).
I look at the 70's and think "haven't we learned any fucking thing ?".
PS On topic, the Unix philosophy is still valid. For a plethora of reasons. I typed too much already but if anyone's interested in my "opinion" i'l write it later today. PPS The author of this piece doesn't even know what "the Unix philosophy" exactly is.
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#475Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#476Everyone should, at some point, read The Unix-Haters Handbook. A great deal of it is outdated or simply wrong, but it does have a running theme of a prediction that has largely been borne out: people assuming that all Unix's flaws are actually virtues and that if you don't think so, then you Just Don't Get It. It's not hard to see how this happened: since pretty much all computers that people normally interact with a…
I love motorcycles too. I've owned many sophisticated bikes: Ducatis with their strange Desmodromic heads. With the ability to dial an exchange of torque to horsepower at the handlebars. Buells with their fuel-in-frame chassis. My current Suzuki even has 4 sensors in the airbox alone. One that measures the air input pressure. One that measures the oxygen level. One that measures the air temperature. Really amazing pe…
Hence UNIX (of a sort) is actually quite popular on both iPhones and Android - but not in ways accessible to the user. Even if you do have to replace Android devices every few years because the manufacturer won't maintain them either.
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#477Everyone should, at some point, read The Unix-Haters Handbook. A great deal of it is outdated or simply wrong, but it does have a running theme of a prediction that has largely been borne out: people assuming that all Unix's flaws are actually virtues and that if you don't think so, then you Just Don't Get It. It's not hard to see how this happened: since pretty much all computers that people normally interact with a…
I did not know about this! http://web.mit.edu/~simsong/www/ugh.pdf It even has an anti-foreword by Dennis Ritchie which kinda reminds me of the Metropolitan Police spokesman's blurb on the back of Banksy's book. BTW, it starts off with an anonymous quote that I've never heard, Two of the most famous products of Berkeley are LSD and Unix. Unix is of course from Bell Labs. And anyone who knew anything would have said i…
Research Unix, yes. But the culture of unix is much bigger than some single copyright holder... this is why the entire thing is plain stupid. Study the levenez family tree. Read the archived Usenet posts and get a copy of the Cuckoos Egg.
BSD IS UNIX.
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#478Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, yes, yes. I'm saddened that tabs have essentially 'lost' - they seem to me in every way superior to spaces, but I would never use them in a new project simply because it would be likely to throw off others, and perhaps tooling. Github, for example, does not play nicely.
They're superior only in C-like languages when you indent in constant-width levels, and then only if you use very short names in your code. Try using tabs to indent e.g. arguments to function one under another, and weep.
Where the terms are distinguished in a programming context, that's alignment, not indentation; tabs for indentation, spaces for alignment is a common suggestion.
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#479Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It always amazed me when someone looks at computer systems of the 70's through the lens of "today's" technology and then projects a failure of imagination on the part of those engineers back in the 70's True enough, but as a younger programmer, I find it pretty reasonable to look back at computer systems of the 70s and wonder if we can do better today . I feel a little bit gross every time I have to write a bash sh…
>True enough, but as a younger programmer, I find it pretty reasonable to look back at computer systems of the 70s and wonder if we can do better today. I feel a little bit gross every time I have to write a bash shell script (or edit config files that aren't JSON/XML/YAML, for that matter), and I don't think that's a bad impulse. That something so inelegant and unsafe is still in widespread use in 2017 really ought…
The lag should be regarded as intolerable, but instead it's routine. I shouldn't have to wait for computers like this.
Shell is a nice idea, but UNIX should either have banned whitespace in filenames or made the shell handle it properly. It's amazing how many things blow up on encountering a space, and you can upset people even further by putting newlines in your file names.
Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy
#480Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the fasteners I have seen are standard metric sizes, what speciality tools are you referring to? The side cover screws can be stubborn but even a Philips #3 with an impact driver ($20.00 at the pawn shop) pops them right off. Conversion kits to standard allen head screws are cheap, on the order of $50.00 for the whole engine. There is a special nut on the oil spinner but that's the only specialty tool I can think…
did you have fun converting JIS to metric? I learned that one the hard way. Three EZ-Outs later...