3 ms·
I don't know enough about the POSIX APIs to comment with any authority on that, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if a long running software project that ha
by ZenoArrow 10y ago
I don't know enough about the POSIX APIs to comment with any authority on that, but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if a long running software project that has been required to stay largely backwards compatible as it evolved has become crufty.
However, the importance of POSIX isn't really to do with specific design details, but rather because it aids in software portability. This is still a desirable trait. In other words, the answer is to design a better portability solution (N.B. For anyone thinking of posting it, the XKCD standards link is not relevant here, you'd want to design something that had support from key stakeholders before it was implemented, there's no requirement to fragment the market).
- throwawayish 10y agoI can tell you right off the bat that POSIX might be better than no "standard" at all, but porting stuff between any POSIX-ish OS still means an actual port. Practically every non-trivial POSIX-ish program is not portable. This also includes quite some supposedly higher level applications written using things like Java, Go, Ruby, Python ... since they all leak POSIX details all over the place and make non-portable use quite easy.