3 ms·
Of course he's changed things about how he works. But ESR was wrong about the specific change he was arguing for (more frameworky code for device drivers) in t
by jbooth 11y ago
Of course he's changed things about how he works. But ESR was wrong about the specific change he was arguing for (more frameworky code for device drivers) in that mess of musings about maturity and intelligence. See elsewhere in this thread for links to the context.
Ironically, imho, Raymond is the one who's afflicted by a "curse of the gifted" in thinking that one can come up with a future proof abstraction in a domain like that.
- noselasd 11y agoThat's a bit odd, as there has been a tremendous amount of framework code built for supporting various classes of device drivers since 2000, greatly reducing code you'd write or duplicate.
- jbooth 11y agoI'm not very in touch with device drivers, but I suspect 'supporting classes of device drivers' vs 'a framework for all device drivers' is at the heart of the disagreement on frameworks here.
- noselasd 11y agoNo - not really, they're both significantly changed since the old days of linux, in the sense that many additional abstractions have been created for supporting a framework for all device drivers, as well as adding frameworks for supporting different classes of device drivers.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]