S?? OS interaction, POSIX and S29

2006-07-11 Thread Aaron Sherman 
There's a bit at the end of the current S29:

 =item A/S??: OS Interaction

I've taken on a few of these, and in doing so found that I was making
some assumptions. I'd like to share those and see if they make sense:

  * POSIX will be a low-level module that slavishly reproduces the
POSIX interfaces as closely as possible (perhaps moreso than
Perl 5)
  * OS, or whatever we call the core OS interaction module, will
have an interface which is entirely driven by Perl 6 and may not
resemble POSIX much at all.
  * OS will use POSIX to implement its functionality, so only POSIX
need know how to get at the lowest level.

Will that be reasonable? Am I stomping on anything?

I'm writing up both an example implementation and an API for OS,
starting with the support needed for getpw just as an arbitrary example,
and trying to feel out where the line between S29 and that document
are There's some overlap, but I want to keep it minimal.

-- 
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Systems Engineer and Toolsmith
We had some good machines, but they don't work no more. -Shriekback

Re: S?? OS interaction, POSIX and S29

2006-07-11 Thread Yuval Kogman 
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 16:46:40 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
 There's a bit at the end of the current S29:
 
  =item A/S??: OS Interaction
 
 I've taken on a few of these, and in doing so found that I was making
 some assumptions. I'd like to share those and see if they make sense:
 
   * POSIX will be a low-level module that slavishly reproduces the
 POSIX interfaces as closely as possible (perhaps moreso than
 Perl 5)
   * OS, or whatever we call the core OS interaction module, will
 have an interface which is entirely driven by Perl 6 and may not
 resemble POSIX much at all.
   * OS will use POSIX to implement its functionality, so only POSIX
 need know how to get at the lowest level.
 
 Will that be reasonable? Am I stomping on anything?

I think OS is kind of bad.

Perl 6 is designed to be embeddable, retargetable, etc.

Sometimes the environment well be JS like, that is you have
(possibly) readonly environment calls (gettimeofday, etc), but not
others (IO)...

Ideally I would like to have something more partitioned, and with a
less binding name than OS.

That said, there's no reason why there shouldn't be a convenience
wrapper around a more partitioned set of APIs, that provides a more
toolchain like approach, and keeps the docs together.

-- 
  Yuval Kogman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://nothingmuch.woobling.org  0xEBD27418



pgpa4KWeuv2pQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature