I can understand and empathize with both perspectives here. On the margin, is it better to have consistent interfaces, or simpler implementation? This debate re

I can understand and empathize with both perspectives here. On the margin, is it better to have consistent interfaces, or simpler implementation? This debate reminds me of the worse-is-better design style, which is supposedly at the root of Unix's success. https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html https://www.jwz.org/doc/worse-is-better.html (copy-paste the link in a new tab. Do not click on it) The worse-is-better philosophy is only slightly different: - Simplicity-the design must be simple, both in implementation and interface. It is more important for the implementation to be simple than the interface. Simplicity is the most important consideration in a design. - Correctness-the design must be correct in all observable aspects. It is slightly better to be simple than correct. - Consistency-the design must not be overly inconsistent. Consistency can be sacrificed for simplicity in some cases, but it is better to drop those parts of the design that deal with less common circumstances than to introduce either implementational complexity or inconsistency. - Completeness-the design must cover as many important situations as is practical. All reasonably expected cases should be covered. Completeness can be sacrificed in favor of any other quality. In fact, completeness must sacrificed whenever implementation simplicity is jeopardized. Consistency can be sacrificed to achieve completeness if simplicity is retained; especially worthless is consistency of interface. Early Unix and C are examples of the use of this school of design, and I will call the use of this design strategy the ``New Jersey approach.'' I have intentionally caricatured the worse-is-better philosophy to convince you that it is obviously a bad philosophy and that the New Jersey approach is a bad approach. However, I believe that worse-is-better, even in its strawman form, has better survival characteristics than the-right-thing, and that the New Jersey approach when used for software is a better approach than the MIT approach.