guy@sun.uucp (Guy Harris) (03/03/86)
> Since Vaxen are ubiquitous (and often more 'respectable' > you might want to read about ACPs (same concept) on vaxen. Oh, you mean the things which, I believe, DEC got rid of in recent VMS releases? XQP's (eXtended QIO Processors) are their replacement, and may also be pluggable in the same way. > I realise that the usual "Un*x is good enough, don't force users to learn > more concepts that they need" argument applies. I suggest that the > discipline of embedding remote proceedure calls into your operating system > (just so it can survive the '80s) will both help you to better organise the > un*x concepts... At the risk of turning this into a plug, I might point out that Sun 1) put a switch mechanism for file systems into our UNIX, into which are plugged a 4.2BSD UNIX file system, an MS-DOS file system, and a network file system, and 2) the network file system in question is based on remote procedure calls, so any lack of such a mechanism in UNIX is a matter of implementation, not concept. > If you don't think the "un*x concepts are good enough" argument applies, > I could be persuaded to post a similar rave about why I think embedded > delimiters in files (eg '\n' in un*x) are a lose. My counter-examples > would be based on files-11 (because so many people have access to it) but I > got the idea from CDC 60-bit machines and refined it making pdp-11s emulate > IBM mainframes (faster that real time!!). I don't think that's what you meant. I sincerely doubt you can make a PDP-11 of any flavor execute 3[67]0 code faster than a 3090 can. *Maybe* faster than a 360/30 (easily faster than a 360/20, but whether that deserves to be called a "mainframe" is questionable). Nevertheless, I'd be curious to see the rave in question - posted to "net.os" (which has seen no postings recently), *not* to net.micro.68k, since it has nothing to do with 68000s. -- Guy Harris {ihnp4, decvax, seismo, decwrl, ...}!sun!guy guy@sun.arpa (yes, really)