3 ms·
You're proposing abandoning the Unix/Posix standards and philosophy in favor of an untested strategy. "Move fast and break things" makes sense for acquiring in
by kerkeslager 4y ago
You're proposing abandoning the Unix/Posix standards and philosophy in favor of an untested strategy.
"Move fast and break things" makes sense for acquiring investors, not so much for core infrastructure that everyone everywhere depends on.
This could work, but you'd need at least a decade of widespread usage to work out all the problems before it would even be worth considering for core infrastructure tools.
- Zuiii 4y agoWhy would that be relevant if the thin wrapper is fully compliant with the POSIX/GNU standards? Busybox with it's single binary, depend-on-arg[0]-hack implantation was at one point an "untested strategy", yet look at it now. Rust's Coreutils need to offer a real uvp if they want to see real adoption. Providing coreutil as a library and not forking processes would certainly qualify as that.