PDA

View Full Version : Linux = to no standars and kernel messed up!!



nrayever
September 30th, 2005, 05:06 AM
Today at my university, IEEE student members had a reunion to discuss a bunch of stuff. I'm actually a member of IEEE, but the reunion before was the first reunion i attended. This time i was decided to talk about LInux. Then a guy that was in charge of computers stand up and talk some stuff, so i told him "so what's up with linux, IEEE and the university??" He told me:


IEEE and Linux had not the same "standards" and ideals. Linux is Promiscuous.

That answer shocked me!! Because he's a linux user, and he likes to program and stuff like it. When the reunion was over, i reached him to try to discuss about that.

So he told me:

As a programmer i know that linux don't use any standards and IEEE always want to have technical datsheet of anything.

Just look at the linux kernel source code, it's a ****ing mess!! That is because linux is free and you don't follow any standar. So if a developer see the code he can't do nothing, because it's not understandable.

He continued talking about a group that exists at my university of linux users, that they would like to promote linux, but not using IEEE and bla bla bla bla...........

This guy really disappointed me. We all know that Linux has many flavors and maybe a less amount of standards, but saying that linux has no "technical datasheet" and because of that, IEEE and Linux must not be combined was pretty stupid!! So then the source code??? What's for?? According to him, is just a bunch of code that is not understandable. Right know i would like to hear some opinions about this!!

Because maybe this type of stupid "Linux Users", as he thinks he is, are damaging Linux to evolve. Do you think he is really a linux user?? Maybe i don't have enough skills to make a program, but i try to cooperate with linux community buying linux devices, t-shirts, etc... and the 2 most importants of all:


1) Not using M$
2) Spreading Linux to the others!!

What do you think about this attitude guys??

Nrayever

drogoh
September 30th, 2005, 07:22 AM
I'd think Linux adheres to many more "standards" than, say, a lot of the half-baked ideas Redmond shovels out to call a "standard".

GeneralZod
September 30th, 2005, 07:54 AM
There's a lot of truth to what he says, though - the Linux kernel has many areas that are in constant flux and have not settled to the degree necessary to be called a standard (the much-bemoaned-by-closed-source-driver-writers lack of a stable driver ABI is just one example), which is why a standards-forming body such as the IEEE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ieee) can only take a limited interest in it.

I've heard from others that the source code is quite a mess, too - this is not at all something to be ashamed of, as Linux is a huge, 14-year project with thousands of contributors. To say that it is "not understandable", though, is doubtless pushing it too far.

Basically, I'd say he has fair points which shouldn't necessarily be taken as a full-out attack on Linux - it's just that the IEEE is heavily involved in documenting very, very exacting standards, which Linux doesn't necessarily have - it's like me writing a first-rate English paper and trying to hand it in as Maths homework. The professor would rightly reject it, not because it is bad, but because it just doesn't have the right qualities (e.g. - lots of Maths!) that the professor needs to see to be able to accept it.

Also, criticising something you love when it needs to be criticised is a very healthy and useful thing to do. Getting upset and accusing someone of being disloyal when they do so is not. Many of the mods of this board have openly criticised aspects of Linux on numerous occassions.

I'm not really sure what the problem is, here.

Edit:

Wait a minute - are you thinking of "standards" in terms of "standards of quality"? If so, that's not what he's referring to - he means a "standard" in the sense of a rigidly and exhaustively documented specification that must be adhered to. Saying that "IEEE and Linux had not the same "standars" and ideals" doesn't mean that Linux doesn't strive for excellence; it simply means that Linux cannot be pinned down and turned into a dry standard that will stand for years, which is the truth.

nrayever
September 30th, 2005, 06:30 PM
rigth know i just remembered that he told the promiscuous stuff, because of the freedom you have in linux, then he told that's why linux has no standard. for me that sound's pretty stupid, if you make a program that works at any platform, then you are doing it with the standards that the various pltaforms require. am i wrong??

maybe he's referring to that is not a structured programming as university professors teach. but if it is in that case, those professors are wrong. i'm learning at this semester Assembler and my professor told me something that i believed was a good way to look programming.


Programming is an art, but there are many different way's to make the same task. Then there are some conventions that you might follow but that is at will of the programmer.

Then something else that he told us and recommended to write it down is comments:


Guys, you should write as more comments as you can, because with that any programmer might get a better idea of what where you doing. This might be to an easier guide to check/update your code.

Maybe we should learn to do this. Add as more comments as you can.

Nrayever

tageiru
September 30th, 2005, 06:50 PM
Just look at the linux kernel source code, it's a ****ing mess!! That is because linux is free and you don't follow any standar. So if a developer see the code he can't do nothing, because it's not understandable.
Not understandable? Its mostly C that follows the conventions in Documentation/CodingStyle. Certainly understandable to me.

nrayever
October 1st, 2005, 02:57 AM
Not understandable? Its mostly C that follows the conventions in Documentation/CodingStyle. Certainly understandable to me.

I agree with you. today, for the first time, i downloaded linux kernel source code to really analize it. as i told before right know i'm studying assembler, but last summer i had my course of c. it was just an introductory course because i'm studing electronic engineering. so with my basic c knowledge i untar and then took a look to the source code. then i realized 2 things. linux kernel is f#$%ing big!!! and the source code is pretty understandable even for me!!!

there are a lot of comments all around the source code, pretty clear, and standardized as the professor once taught me. so in this case what should someone think about that guy that told me that linux is promiscuous???

have any one look at the linux kernal source code?? just for curiosity????

nrayever