Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (02 Aug 2019 08:23 UTC)
Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (02 Aug 2019 12:38 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (02 Aug 2019 17:43 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela (02 Aug 2019 18:41 UTC)
(missing)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela (02 Aug 2019 19:53 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (02 Aug 2019 20:00 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (02 Aug 2019 20:44 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (02 Aug 2019 21:22 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela (02 Aug 2019 21:24 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (02 Aug 2019 21:50 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (02 Aug 2019 21:28 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela (02 Aug 2019 22:02 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (09 Aug 2019 21:40 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela (09 Aug 2019 22:25 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (09 Aug 2019 22:53 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (10 Aug 2019 01:33 UTC)
Unix logging systems Lassi Kortela (10 Aug 2019 08:19 UTC)
Re: Unix logging systems Duy Nguyen (10 Aug 2019 11:00 UTC)
Re: Unix logging systems hga@xxxxxx (10 Aug 2019 11:47 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (02 Aug 2019 20:50 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (02 Aug 2019 21:39 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster hga@xxxxxx (02 Aug 2019 22:42 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela (02 Aug 2019 22:55 UTC)
Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster John Cowan (03 Aug 2019 02:51 UTC)

Re: Amendment 1 to Making SRFI-170 less of a monster Lassi Kortela 02 Aug 2019 22:55 UTC

>     Ah, the more I think about it, the better I like it.  Scheme
>     implementation gurus have to write the lower level one to interact
>     with their implementation, while the higher level needs experts in
>     how to least unsafely do spawn et. al. on Linux, the BSDs, etc.
>
> We already have too many experts in how to do things unsafely.  But a
> safe and easy-to-understand design can have bad implementations
> replaced.

If the subject is OS interfaces, I think *both* of the classical
approaches are wrong (!)

The only hope is to have some "OS sherpas" who know the details of the
current crop of operating systems, can make educated guesses of future
developments, and can combine all that knowledge to craft something that
has a good chance to stand the test of time.

The problem with the safe and easy designs is that they usually leave
out some crucial detail you need. This was the bane of most high-level
languages for long. The situation is better nowadays, but IIRC a major
asset of Perl back in the day is that it had a _comprehensive_ Unix API,
not just the Platonic ideals of system calls.