Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site boring.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!boring!jack
From: jack@boring.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.lan
Subject: Re: STREAMS
Message-ID: <6651@boring.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Oct-85 09:53:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: boring.6651
Posted: Tue Oct 15 09:53:20 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Oct-85 20:13:06 EDT
References: <480@enmasse.UUCP>
Reply-To: jack@boring.UUCP (Jack Jansen)
Distribution: net
Organization: AMOEBA project, CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 27
Xref: linus net.unix-wizards:12437 net.lan:949
Apparently-To: rnews@mcvax.LOCAL

In article <480@enmasse.UUCP> dave@enmasse.UUCP (Dave Brownell) writes:

>As the person who originally posted the query, I can't help but be
>amused by what's come out of it.  It seems like most people here are
>more concerned with elegance in the kernel than in user interfaces.
>
>So far as I'm concerned, the ONLY interesting thing about UCB sockets is
>the user interface:  the socket() system call and its friends connect(),
>bind(), accept(), and so on. 
wrong Wrong WRONG!!!.
You'll never succeed to give the user a pretty interface without the internal
organization being pretty, too.
Everything might work OK for the first release, but when features are added,
and the implementation gets hairier and hairier it will show through at
the user interface.

A clean design, that matches the implementation to the user interface in
an elegant and easy-to-understand way is *much* easier to maintain and
upgrade.

Besides all this, of course, I still think that the BSD networking user 
interface is the worst mistake in the history of unix:-)


-- 
	Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP
	The shell is my oyster.