Re: The naming of at()s is a difficult matter

[Matthew Frost]

--- "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Joerg Schilling wrote:
> > 
> > I am not shure if this would match the rules from the Opengroup.
> > Solaris has these interfaces since at least 5 years.
> > 
> 
> Surely you're not suggesting that TOG's job is to rubber-stamp bad 
> Solaris decisions...

No, he's suggesting that precedent should apply across unixen.  It makes
sense to Joerg, who programs for the lot of them like they share object
inheritance.  This is sometimes more problematic than others (vis a vis
cdrecord).  Joerg is disinclined to support the kind of compulsive
re-engineering that Linus encourages, even though you might do it because
it would make more sense re-engineered a certain way.  If I've understood
correctly (and charitably), he prefers compatibility over novelty.

I myself like functional novelty over conformant compatibility in the
adiaphora.

Matt

> 
> 	-hpa
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel"
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/