-
@Jonathan_Blow @belickim Could you elaborate on "the real problem is the unix philosophy"? In the attached interpretation I think we can agree that the third point is naive (and leads smoothly into your critique of LSP in your recent talk). In the other two, [1/]Permalink On twitter.com
❤️ 2 Favorites Mood -5 🙁
-
@Jonathan_Blow @belickim the approach of separating complexity into simpler/leaner *programs* can be considered harmful (see vswhere), but do you disagree with the general notion of dividing problems into components and simplifying each of them? [2/]On twitter.com
-
@Jonathan_Blow @belickim Clearly "overdividing" can lead to problems (e.g. need to keep or synchronize state between to places/representations etc), but this should be considered bad style in any case - problems and concepts need to be broken up at natural boundaries, which are hard to find. [3/]Permalink On twitter.com
-
@Jonathan_Blow @belickim To me personally, it seems like this LSP problem stems from *enabling* the core of the unix philosophy (complexity-by-composition) on too many levels (functions in libraries; libaries; programs; machines on network). [4/4]Permalink On twitter.com