Date: Fri, 26 Jun 1998 07:12:13 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: mi@aldan.algebra.com (Mikhail Teterin) Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: buffering in user space (was Heads up: block devices to disappear!) Message-ID: <199806260712.AAA16363@usr01.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <199806251344.JAA27893@rtfm.ziplink.net> from "Mikhail Teterin" at Jun 25, 98 09:44:34 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> =I agree; buffering should be done in user programs. > = > =Death to stdio! > > mi@rtfm:/tmp (558) nm /usr/lib/libc.so.3.1 | grep putchar > 00009c80 T _putchar > > To the best of my knowledge, stdio is part of libc and thus lives > in user-space already. Or is this because ANSI comittee is against > implementing SMB servers in user space? > > I may very well be wrong, but stdio seems like a poor example. The point is "why write code that utilizes a library (or kernel) when you can rewrite it yourself and include it as overhead in every program, instead of promoting code reuse?". It was sarcasm on what I view as the stupidity of the reinvention of block devices in user space libraries instead of the kernel. If you are going to do something that requires more work, the place to do it is a lower level than where you plan on implementing. If this is "block devices", then the place to implement it is the kernel, not in every user space program that expect block devices. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199806260712.AAA16363>