4 ms·

Are you saying you disagree with the use of subroutines, functions and interfaces? After all, they are essentially small programs that do one thing and do it we

Are you saying you disagree with the use of subroutines, functions and interfaces? After all, they are essentially small programs that do one thing and do it well.

cousin_it 11y ago
Note the part about text streams in fauigerzigerk's comment. If all functions were limited to accepting a text stream and returning a text stream, the overall program would quickly become a ball of mud.
fauigerzigerk 11y ago
No, I don't disagree with the use of functions or interfaces at all, but functions in particular are a programming language construct and as such not easily extended across programming languages, processes and networks, mostly due to different type systems and error states. I think it's not an accident or historical vestige that Unix philosophy uses the word "program". It has technical as well as social implications that have barely changed in the past 50 years. Functions and programs are certainly not an either-or kind of thing but making them one and the same would require a very different kind of operating system than we have ever seen. Say, emacs OS :)
- contingencies 11y ago
  Functions in particular are a programming language construct and as such not easily extended across programming languages, processes and networks, mostly due to different type systems and error states [...] it's not an accident or historical vestige that Unix philosophy uses the word "program". It has technical as well as social implications that have barely changed in the past 50 years. Insightful.
- justwannasing 11y ago
  Then I think you are confused or inexperienced because Unix does not treat everything as a text stream and you say functions in a programming language are different so they are better is not a wise statement. It appears you don't understand the fundamental concept and think Unix hasn't improved over the years.

Are you saying you disagree with the use of subroutines, functions and interfaces? After all, they are essentially small programs that do one thing and do it well.

cousin_it 11y ago

Note the part about text streams in fauigerzigerk's comment. If all functions were limited to accepting a text stream and returning a text stream, the overall program would quickly become a ball of mud.

fauigerzigerk 11y ago

No, I don't disagree with the use of functions or interfaces at all, but functions in particular are a programming language construct and as such not easily extended across programming languages, processes and networks, mostly due to different type systems and error states. I think it's not an accident or historical vestige that Unix philosophy uses the word "program". It has technical as well as social implications that have barely changed in the past 50 years. Functions and programs are certainly not an either-or kind of thing but making them one and the same would require a very different kind of operating system than we have ever seen. Say, emacs OS :)

contingencies 11y ago
Functions in particular are a programming language construct and as such not easily extended across programming languages, processes and networks, mostly due to different type systems and error states [...] it's not an accident or historical vestige that Unix philosophy uses the word "program". It has technical as well as social implications that have barely changed in the past 50 years. Insightful.
justwannasing 11y ago
Then I think you are confused or inexperienced because Unix does not treat everything as a text stream and you say functions in a programming language are different so they are better is not a wise statement. It appears you don't understand the fundamental concept and think Unix hasn't improved over the years.