[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?
From: |
Alfred M\. Szmidt |
Subject: |
Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then? |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Oct 2005 19:32:21 +0200 |
> If and only if one considers globally shared mutable namespaces
> broken. People with a lispish background don't.
This is ironic, because this is precisely the reason why the Hurd
is not a LispOS.
I never claimed that it should be a LispOS, even though I'd like that
it would be a bit more LispOSish. Recall that LispOS was a
_single_user_ system, it wasn't a multiuser system (even though it
could be used as such, to some extent).
This is why I'm for the `each user has one global name-space' variant
(i.e. what exists today), but in addition to not being tied down by
the system administrator as to what can run on the system (like
drivers, file-systems, etc).
- Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?, (continued)
- Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?, Brian Brunswick, 2005/10/27
- Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?, Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/27
- Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/27
- Name spaces in programming languages, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/27
- Re: Name spaces in programming languages, Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/27
- Re: Name spaces in programming languages, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/28
- Re: Name spaces in programming languages, Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/28
- Re: Name spaces in programming languages, Ludovic Courtès, 2005/10/28
- Re: Name spaces in programming languages, Alfred M\. Szmidt, 2005/10/28
- Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?, Marcus Brinkmann, 2005/10/27
- Re: Fwd: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?,
Alfred M\. Szmidt <=
Re: Which 90% of POSIX /is/ good then?, Jonathan S. Shapiro, 2005/10/27