Hi, On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 06:12:00PM +1100, William Leslie wrote:
> 0. Language level object models tend to be finer grained than those > exposed by the operating system. > > This item is to be taken with a grain of salt, because unix is best > used when composing simpler processes at a fine granularity. However, > this does not seem to be the common pattern today, and I think there > are two different reasons. Antrik has mentioned before that the > concept of the monolithic application is designed to serve the > interests of the proprietary software developer - so the user can > associate features (that could have been obvious for the user to > implement had the program been structured better) with the > application; I think that the resulting impression on modern > programmers is sadly not going away in the short term. [...] > The impression I am trying to give here is that the sort of > interactivity that Antrik talks about in his post[1] on Deep Mehta may > be much more applicable when there is less distance between objects > and functions as the system sees them and objects as the application > developer sees them. This is a nice way to put it. I haven't thought about it in these terms before; but I'm sure it will greatly help me in explaining it and thinking about it in the future :-) BTW, I'm a bit surprised that you only linked the older article -- although the recent one more explicitely talks about this stuff, and in fact you referred to a specific passage from this article in your first paragraph: http://tri-ceps.blogspot.com/2009/06/one-shell-to-rule-them-all.html -antrik-
