[Info-vax] portable sequential file formats

[David Froble]

lists at openmailbox.org wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Mar 2015 14:56:10 -0700 (PDT)
> mcleanjoh--- via Info-vax <info-vax at rbnsn.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Monday, March 16, 2015 at 8:30:06 PM UTC+11, li... at openmailbox.org
>> wrote:
>>> For me I'm so fed up with Intel's neverending screwups and I don't like
>>> UNIX very much. I'm a developer for my job and also in my vanishing
>>> spare time for fun, so I was looking for another platform that was
>>> neither UNIX, Linux, nor Windows and runs on non-Intel hardware. I
>>> thought looking into other hardware platforms would be a pleasant way
>>> to spend the little free time I have. I didn't know VMS was still
>>> around and I didn't pay attention to it when it was more popular.
>>>
>>> Are you saying they get frustrated because the switches are inconsistent
>>> across commands? I find UNIX sloppy and poorly thought out because there
>>> are simply too many options for things. It seems half or 3/4 of the
>>> bugfixes end up as new command line switches. But that's just the tip of
>>> the iceberg. UNIX wasn't ever designed, it just happened. And I really
>>> don't like that.
>>>
>>> -- 
>> Unix suffers from inconsistency in a lot of areas and Linux is a whole
>> lot worse.
> 
> My opinion as I said is UNIX wasn't designed. It just happened.
> 
>> One simple example is lack of consistency in each command.  You typically
>> find that a few alpha characters were related to what the program might
>> do but the rest of the switches were just "we need another flag".  And
>> even the commands are inconsistent with 'tar' and 'find' having odd
>> formats (and even my Linux book says so).
> 
> You are preaching to the choir.
> 
>> Some Linux documentation is okay but some is atrocious; it just depends
>> on who wrote it because there seems to be no standards and no overall
>> co-ordinator.  Sure you can try to find things on the Internet by the
>> code samples you find can be in lots of different languages and are more
>> "I did it this way" than explaining what's going on.
> 
> Agreed. I don't understand how anybody can use Linux or most UNIX in
> production for anything. There are a few exceptions, Solaris is
> professionally documented and it works very well. But it's still UNIX so it
> suffers from the same lack of naming conventions and where Sun hasn't fixed
> it, the same non-design and sloppy, generic implementations that plague UNIX
> generally. And they're all based on C which is the root of all evil- it's
> not *if* something bad is going to happen it's just when and how often.
> 

Did somebody clone me ??????????????