Re: [dev] Re: Worse is better: Plan9 and Linux?

From: Peter Wiehe <>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 17:48:09 +0100

Hello Laslo!

Am 30. Oktober 2019 17:38:27 MEZ schrieb Laslo Hunhold <>:
>On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 16:02:54 +0100
>Peter Wiehe <> wrote:
>Dear Peter,
>> I didn't have simple programs in mind when I said "fast hack".
>> Instead of fast hacks I could call it "direct coding with minimal
>> design". Maybe that's not much of a difference. I think often
>> developers themselves call it a fast hack. Sorry if that's
>> disrespectful. I try to avoid that term in the future.
>> So what do you think of Plan9 when you say simple UI programs are
>> harder to maintain?
>central to every program, I think, are data structures. If you manage
>to do that right, everything else seems to fall into place. That's at
>least the experience I had over the last few years.
>Many people think that the UI somehow reflects data structures, but
>often the opposite is true. Many people that develop software with
>"simple UIs" often have a UI-driven approach, yielding horrible data
>structures and lots of hacky code as they try to compensate the bad
>data structures.
>If you ask me, if you find your data structures to be flawed and you
>cannot fix it, you might as well start again and redefine your data
>structures. This does not mean that your interface has to change, just
>the internal representation.
>To answer your question in a way: Little code does not mean little
>time, the opposite is true. It often takes a lot of time,
>reconsideration and rewriting to formulate code that is short, elegant
>and easy to maintain and extend.
>With best regards

So my question to you is:
how do you put Linux and Plan9 into this scala?
(I get the feeling you deliberately don't want to understand my question.)

Kind regards
Received on Wed Oct 30 2019 - 17:48:09 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 30 2019 - 18:00:10 CET