Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

kukuruku.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 616 posts

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#481

Post by TeMPOraL »

dragonwriter wrote: post #478
TeMPOraL wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> 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.

Sure, as long as you don't mix them on one line (i.e. first indent, then align), because then differences between tab widths will still break alignment.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#482

Post by pjc50 »

bad_user wrote: post #368
sowhatquestion wrote: post #363

Earlier 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…

> why be content with the existing design!? Because backwards compatibility is more important. We can't just throw everything away every couple of years. Besides, who is to tell that the newer design will be better? Judging by the history of our industry, I have some serious doubts.

Exactly. Backwards compatibility is king. There have been plenty of research operating systems which never made it to popularity; not just Plan 9 but things like BeOS and Nemesis. The network effects driving people to consolidate on one system are huge.

Browser design is a mess, but that's because it's a battlefield between competing demands. We're very lucky it's remained open and competitive. There's an alternate universe somewhere where IE6 won and you have to use ActiveX controls to enter your government ID before you can post to websites. (Oh wait, that's South Korea in this universe http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-29617196)

You can write a better operating system, but unless it runs a browser and you can give it away for free it will have a very limited audience.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#483

Post by KWxIUElW8Xt0tD9 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #250
rootbear wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had much the same reaction. I learned Unix on a PDP-11 running sixth edition AT&T. I was also using the University's UNIVAC 1108 and the elegance, simplicity and orthogonality of the Shell vs the EXEC-8 command language was a joy to behold. Sure, there is much about Unix that could be better and I sometimes regret that Plan 9 didn't succeed more. But it's like Kirk said to Saavik, "You have to learn WHY things work…

I think it is this ambiguity of tab that was the source of confusion. Certainly on DEC machines at the time, when you typed 'tab' in and editor that was inserting text it was because you wanted an ASCII TAB character in your text. What was more, the program could just echo the TAB character to the terminal you were using and the terminal would "do the correct thing" for displaying that tab. Back in the 90's when 'mod…

I worked on a product at AT&T Bell Labs back in the 80's/90's that had a config file that had tabs and spaces mixed on the same line -- and it mattered.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#484

Post by jstimpfle »

paulddraper wrote: post #342
GalacticDomin8r wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To argue for the OP, consider the case of passwd being parsed on every system call. That is simply sub-optimal. passwd is not read every system call and anything that is read frequently is almost certainly in the fs cache. I got about 3 assertions into the article before I decided I had enough of that bullshit.

Note that "read from disk" and "parsed" are two different things.

In any case I haven't heard of performance problems. I think these files are needed basically for logging in and when tools like "ls" convert UIDs to names.

If there were performance problems, something would be done. And you can easily switch to LDAP or your backend of preference.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#485

Post by adrianN »

Walf wrote: post #473
adrianN wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every editor worth its salt does this for you. Maybe try upgrading from ed.

If only there was a way not to have to rely on editors all behaving the same with leading spaces. Oh wait, there is a way: indent with tabs.

I also prefer tabs. I'm just saying that "I have to wear out my spacebar" is not a good argument.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#486

Post by smitherfield »

dredmorbius wrote: post #407
ci5er wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How were the mid-90s a dark time for Unix? Every engineers desk at every place I worked and every d/c I deployed to, it was the the only option (I avoided the AS-400, workhorse that it may well have been). Now, which Unix (HPUX, Solaris, AIX, IRIX) caused some angst, depending on the use-case...

Unix was under assault from various sides. The vendors were fighting amongst themselves for supremacy. Take a look at Larry McVoy's "Free Unix" whitepaper. https://www.landley.net/history/mirror/unix/srcos.html IBM had developed OS/2, but was unable to effectively market it, in large part due to the intransigence of its development partner, Microsoft, who had other designs. Microsoft was of course pushing Windows NT…

People were really replacing Unix stacks with mainframes? That they didn't already have? In the 90's?

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#487

Post by cderwin »

markhahn wrote: post #464
scribu wrote: post #236

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"

It certainly ought to be uncontroversial to suggest that the general arc of progress tends upward, and that software is no exception. That has been a constant refrain for millenia.

Saying that they lacked imagination is diminuitive and self-serving but certainly we can do better than those who came before us, and those who come after us will do better than us.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#488

Post by vram22 »

trentnelson wrote: post #191
vram22 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting comment. Got to say I agree with the direction of it, to some extent - stable and powerful over newfangled and weak / unstable / buggy / done for glory rather than substance. Do you know about the Royal Enfield Bullet [1] from India? It is not at all as technologically sophisticated as the bikes you mention and others, but it is a fantastic bike to ride. They are selling it in the West, too, from some yea…

Hey, Royal Enfield! My uncle was behind the company that was the sole distributor of Royal Enfield for Australia/NZ for a good decade or so (sold the business a few years ago).

Interesting.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#489

Post by vram22 »

fstephany wrote: post #400
vram22 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting comment. Got to say I agree with the direction of it, to some extent - stable and powerful over newfangled and weak / unstable / buggy / done for glory rather than substance. Do you know about the Royal Enfield Bullet [1] from India? It is not at all as technologically sophisticated as the bikes you mention and others, but it is a fantastic bike to ride. They are selling it in the West, too, from some yea…

My cousin and two of his friends recently did New Delhi - Brussels[0] on 1971, 1973 and 1974 Royal Enfields.They made it but they got a lot of mechanical problems. I guess that was part of the fun ;) I almost bought a Bullet Classic 500 (sold with injection in Europe). It is probably much more reliable but it is probably a bit too limited for a 100km daily commute. I went with a modern Triumph Street Twin instead. Th…

Pretty cool trip.

Re: The Collapse of the Unix Philosophy

#490

Post by cderwin »

192837821912 wrote: post #427
tnone wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know that thing about how old ideas in science can only really be replaced when their supporters die? Unix greybeards, this is about you.

Sure, but the follow-up systems would be worse. I haven't seen a single actual improvement in software in 10 years. It's all churn and bloat.

There is good and bad, but you certainly must be blind if you think the progress of technology has been relatively stagnant since the introduction of unix. Just a couple things that come to mind:

* The internet (early 90s)

* Wireless networking (early 2000s)

* Highly portable, small, and lightweight computers (early 2010s)

and all the software that supports them. These "follow-up systems" are certainnly better than their predecessors, and there are literally countless more examples (no, everything shouldn't be written in asm and c).

Post reply on HN