| 1 |
Canek Peláez Valdés: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:46 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> • "There's still value in understanding the traditional UNIX "do one |
| 4 |
>>> thing and do it well" model where many workflows can be done as a |
| 5 |
>>> pipeline of simple tools each adding their own value, but let's face |
| 6 |
>>> it, it's not how complex systems really work, and it's not how major |
| 7 |
>>> applications have been working or been designed for a long time. It's |
| 8 |
>>> a useful simplification, and it's still true at *some* level, but I |
| 9 |
>>> think it's also clear that it doesn't really describe most of |
| 10 |
>>> reality." |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> He doesn't make an actual argument why useful abstraction cannot be done |
| 14 |
>> in complex systems. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> He doesn't need to; |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Sure he does. He made a statement that needs technical arguments (not |
| 19 |
stuff like "people do it these days") and didn't even answer the |
| 20 |
reporters question. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I think this is not a problem about complex systems, but rather about |
| 23 |
development models. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
But no wonder a C programmer in one of the highest commit rate projects |
| 26 |
in the world thinks like that. And it's probably even true in that CASE. |
Archives