posix has been rendered useless, isn't it?

[Mayuresh Kathe]

On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 11:39:26AM -0600, William A. Mahaffey III wrote:
> On 12/21/14 10:56, Polytropon wrote:
> > On Sun, 21 Dec 2014 21:26:37 +0530, Mayuresh Kathe wrote:
> >> i have been studying the unix way of doing things,
> >> i.e. tool-chaining to combine small programs for
> >> accomplishing a solution.
> > A noble goal.
> >
> >
> >
> >> but, almost none of today's servers built for any
> >> of today's unix-like systems adhere to the unix
> >> philosophy. most of them instead, are large
> >> applications.
> > The creation of monolithic applications can be a
> > problem sometimes. It's often being accellerated
> > by GUI paradigms where "one big program" is, often
> > on the basic of object oriented programming (and
> > the typical misunderstandings and misconceptions
> > of that orientation), being "required" - you simply
> > cannot easily apply the UNIX principles here.
> >
> 
> Correctly applied OOP is (kinda) an extension of the UNIX philosophy 
> .... Well designed/documented/implemented objects can be assembled into 
> useful (compiled) programs readily & quickly. Incorrectly applied, or 
> crappy objects & you have a mess ....
> 

somehow, tightly coupled 'oop' implementations, eg. c++, ada, etc.
don't feel like an extension of the unix philosophy, infact, they
give a feel of being at the opposite end, the 'vms' philosophy.
on the other hand, loosely coupled 'oop' implementations, eg. obj-c,
java, etc. are quite in tune with the unix philosophy, of having
each object doing it's job and doing it well, and communicating with
other objects by passing messages.

in that case, would you say that tightly coupled 'oop' systems
exhibit incorrect application of 'oop'?

apologies about veering off the list topic, but, i am working through
the design for a combination of compiled, loosely coupled objects using
any language, working across architectures and over heterogenous
networks. and yes, that system is a far cry from being called 'oop'.

would such a system, in theory, be made to run atop the freebsd kernel
and do away with the 'posix' layer? yes, but the question is whether
it would get accepted by the community at large.

~mayuresh