-------- Joseph Gwinn writes: > On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 07:08:25 +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> The other ting to keep in mind is the immense existing codebase of > unix kernels et al, not to mention application code depending on > those kernels. This is the mistake we IT-people keep doing again and again: Forwards compatibility is /far/ more important than backwards compatibility. For one thing, there is a finite amount of code to be backwards compatible with, whereas the amount of future code is practically infinite. Back in 1990 we had what, 30 years of legacy code for a quite small industry ? Now we have that /and/ another 30 years of code produced by a vastly larger industry. "Immense existing codebase" ... not so much. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. _______________________________________________ LEAPSECS mailing list LEAPSECS@leapsecond.com https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
