index concept yachts_and_racing_dinghies system_niches elements_principles designs journal

// Elements and principles

Here, we consider forces that can influence the design of a platform.

These are not the design principles of dinghy.

We look at existing work in order to think.

::: Cheap process forking

    Element of unix.

    It allows developers to compose systems with a strategy of forking work to
    create short-lived processes.

    This concept seems to be often good for prototyping, and often bad for

    Use of unix pipe in the shell to chain commands together. Upside: allows
    for rapid composition of complex pipelines from simple tools. Downside:
    requires lots of copying.

    The early apache webserver httpd handled CGI through such a strategy: the
    server spawned a new child process for each request.

    Upside: Offloads lots of nasty concurrency problems onto the operating
    system, which has already had to solve those problems.
    Downside: does not scale as well as later single-process efforts like
    apache 2 (uses threads) and nginx (focus on async techniques).

::: Network-centric filesystem

    Most commonly seen in institutions with lots of unix systems arranged
    around a large NFS filesystem held on high-cost equipment.

    Has practical value. A dedicated team can ensure data is backed up. You
    can log in from any system. You can easily share data between operators.

    Network-centric filesystem is an anti-pattern in some some settings. If
    you are processing lots of data, network-centric filesystems encourage
    users to be in a mindset of drawing data to work. At scale, it is better
    to instead send work to data.

::: Everything is a file

    This is contested territory. We will handle it through different
    perspectives, below.

::: Everything is a stream of bytes

    The unix way.

    There is a central hierarchical filesystem.

    Things that are not data-stored-on-disk can be attached to the hierarchy
    as though they were, and you can interact with them using the same tools
    as you would use to interact with data-stored-on-disk. (Kind of. Some of
    the time.)

    There is some elegance. You can use select(2) to detect non-blocking
    behaviour across both files and sockets and stdin. Kind of. This is not at
    all possible in Windows.

    There is some inelegance. Lots of edge-cases. Calling select(2) on files
    does not behave the same as calling it on network sockets. There are
    things you can't write to.

    Linus wrote,

        The whole point with "everything is a file" is not that you have some
        random filename (indeed, sockets and pipes show that "file" and
        "filename" have nothing to do with each other), but the fact that you
        can use common tools to operate on different things.

    And later,

        The UNIX philosophy is often quoted as "everything is a file", but
        that really means "everything is a stream of bytes".

        In Windows, you have 15 different versions of "read()" with sockets
        and files and pipes all having strange special cases and special
        system calls. That's not the UNIX way. It should be just a "read()",
        and then people can use general libraries and treat all sources the

::: Everything is a namespace

    The plan-9 way.

    Plan-9 could be seen as an an extreme application of everything is a file.

    Linus uses the term {Everything is a namespace} to contrast the Plan-9
    ethos from the {Everything is a stream of bytes} principle as he
    interprets it.

    Plan-9 achieves minimalism through rigid structuring of the system into
    namespaces that look like filesystems.

    In Plan-9, there is a standard interface (namespace) that presents as
    though it is a filesystem. Applications present as filesystems. Network
    connections present like filesystems. The system interface presents like a

    Consequently, that system-call interface is very small.

    The system is discoverable. You can browse around /proc and look for

    It can take effort to build all applications so as to honour this
    interface. How do you implement a web browser such that it exposes itself
    as a namespace? Perhaps this speaks less of plan-9 failure, and instead of
    what a terrible settlement the web is.

::: Everything is an icon

    The BeOS/Haiku way

    A variety of concepts are exposed to a browsable GUI as icons.

    Concept of a hierarchical filesystem.

    Icons represent metadata and an optional stream of data (file).
    Sophisticated use of metadata tags leads to an innovative type of naked
    application. In one example, users interact with email without the use of
    an email client. A daemon draws mail down into icons as it arrives. Users
    use the GUI to view their set of email. There are small, distinct programs
    for viewing and writing email.

    This hints at a design tradition to rival vs monolithic applications such
    as Outlook and Photoshop.

    Imagine an art program where each layer was a file in a directory.

    With that said, I am wary of this as a design principle.

    IPC-via-filesystem suffers from tragedy-of-the-common interface bleed.
    Imagine reading a file and expecting to see X or Y. But the writer wrote
    Z. Who is at fault?

::: Everything is an interface

    Imagine an operating system where there was no filesystem. Rather, you had
    to interact with interfaces. You could use existing tools to construct new
    types and interfaces, and then interact with those.

    Consider: how to interact with the network, which produces data that is
    outside your sphere of control.

::: The Memory Map is the Computer

    What is the essence of the computer?

    Here we consider that it could be the memory map.

    Computer architectures often presents several types of memory in a single
    memory map. By accessing addresses A to B, you can read from ROM.
    Addresses B to C will hook into standard RAM. Addresses C to D will hook
    into video ram.

    Potentially, you could build an instruction architecture strictly oriented
    around reads and writes to memory. You could even implement mathematics
    operations as a consequence of writing to fake addresses.

    What behaviour would we expect when the program attempts to divide by

::: The CPU is the Computer

    What is the essence of the computer?
    Someone might point to the Central Processing Unit. You can tell by its
    name that it is the heart of the computer.

    The CPU reads from memory and writes to memory, and thereby drives

    Computers are inherently synchronous.

::: The Bus is the Computer

    What is the essence of the computer?

    It is the bus.
    The term CPU is a misnomer. Processing cores are simply peers on a bus.

    Operations come and go: user input, network interaction, interrupts.

    Computers are inherently asynchronous.

::: The Backbone is the Computer

    This strictly follows the logic of "The Bus is the Computer" to a further

    Picture a system which is a set of computers arranged around a private,
    contained network. They are running different nodes of a single deployment
    of a software system.

    Operations come and go. Computers are simply peers on a bus.

    Computers are inherently asynchronous.

::: Multi-threading

    Mainstream operating systems are generally synchronous. Mainstream
    applications are generally asynchronous. Multithreading is a means for
    bridging those two worlds.

::: Pure async

    Speculation: what about an OS where all system interactions were based on

    Tannenbaum comments

::: GUI-driven development

    Applications where the developer starts with a GUI, and then works out the
    data structures later.

    - Programs written in Visual Basic
    - Programs written in Interface Builder/WO
    - Stuff build for MacOS classic

    Problem: data structures tend to be a mess. Concurrency tends to be a

::: Outliner-driven development

    Userland Frontier presents an outliner as the entrypoint into the system.

    (Need to do work here. Waiting on a house move to unpack my computers)

::: System as Lord Protector

    Computers are necessarily complicated.

    System software has a duty to silently run things in an orderly manner,
    The user should only be exposed to things they are likely to care about.

::: System as Jailor

    Computers are not necessarily complicated.

    Systems software should not make the owner feel like a guest in their own

::: Liquid hardware is Awesome

    Microchips are obsolete.

    We can build what we want in FPGAs.
    We can create hardware without needing to get our hands dirty again.

    We can easily create extra layers.

::: Liquid hardware is Terrifying

    Intel has put lots of hidden layers into our main computing platform. The
    security is dodgy.

    Unless we are careful, all those problems are going to get a lot worse
    with FPGAs. How could you know if your FPGA had been backdoored?

    We should be wary of every layer.