RetroFed Forums
Your home away from modern life.
The Unix way and integration complexity
Post Reply
AuthorMessage
arty
feddit.org
arty@feddit.org
Joined: 2024-07-02
Posted: · edited   Subject: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote

Over the decades I’ve seen the praise and critique of the "Unix way". I don’t remember reading about the aspect I’ll describe below. This might be a banality, and I haven’t invested much thought into it either. I’m just curious to hear your opinions.

At the core of the Unix way is that tools should do just one thing. Users very often need results that can only be achieved after doing several things. With only single-purpose tools at hand, users have to integrate them. In other words, the tool authors delegate integration to the users.

Here’s the idea I want to discuss. In programming languages, integrating various modules to achieve a goal is already a complex task because we often have to handle numerous failure modes and edge cases. In shell scripts this is much worse, since shells are more limited than programming languages. Writing a tool that does only one thing looks like avoiding the most complicated task. Which leads to a conclusion that the Unix way only works well in a rather small fraction of use cases; the majority of cases are better served by different approaches.

What do you think?

8   Original
hendrik
palaver.p3x.de
hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
Joined: 2021-08-21
#2 Posted:   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

On the other hand a programmer rarely knows exactly what I'm trying to accomplish. Do I want to count the characters in a textfile? Or the words? Do I want to sort the files by size? age? filename? And which of those am I trying to move? What if I want to delete all files older than 30 days which don't have the word "elephant" in them? I mean sure, you can implement all of that in a very complex program with a very convoluted user interface... Or you do it the Unix way and give me seperate (simple) tools to count, a tool to sort, search text... and a way to connect it to the delete tool.

2
arty
feddit.org
arty@feddit.org
Joined: 2024-07-02
#3 Posted:   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

On the other hand a programmer rarely knows exactly what I'm trying to accomplish. Do I want to count the characters in a textfile? Or the words? Do I want to sort the files by size? age? filename? And which of those am I trying to move? What if I want to delete all files older than 30 days which don't have the word "elephant" in them? I mean sure, you can implement all of that in a very comple...

Continuing the train of thought from the post: an approach that might serve you better is not a universal program that does everything. It is rather a custom program that does what you need. It very likely will apply reusable code, but in the form of modules instead of programs. It will be much easier to write well than to write a bash script well.

2
brainwashed
feddit.org

brainwashed@feddit.org
Joined: 2025-01-28
#4 Posted:   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

I think the Unix way is a great ideal if you develop composable cli tools, functions or libraries. In each its easier to reason and recombine a thing, that does one specific thing. More complex user problems are then solved by combining multiple simpler components. Lots of modern graphical user interfaces neither think about what the user might want to do, just offering everything, nor prescribe a specific workflow, which just leaves users that have a only a vague idea of what they want to do or a porgram could do, confused.

Being more unixy would be great for mobile apps as well. iOS for example has these app shortcuts which expose functionality of an app to be combined with other apps featuers. I think once siri AI takes hold this could be done. I think, however, the monetization realities of most software will always pressure them to do lots of things and lock the user in.

5
thedeadwalking4242
lemmy.world
thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world
Joined: 2023-08-10
#5 Posted:   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

I think a big portion of the unix philosophy is to be easy for development. Not for consumers or customers.

The idea is that it will be easier for developers more complex software and flexible software if the pieces they are working with are well defined.

2
banana_pie
piefed.zip
banana_pie@piefed.zip
Joined: 2026-10-22
#6 Posted:   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

Unix is dead. Everyone ships RESTful services + web UI. Underlying platform doesn't make a difference. You could ship it on Windows server and no one would notice.

1
TrollAccount69
lemmy.ml
TrollAccount69@lemmy.ml
Joined: 2026-08-10
#7 Posted:   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

The Unix way isn’t for people who can’t integrate those tools.

Ever been in the drivers seat of an 18 wheeler? Even just getting into one requires more physical exertion than getting into your car. When you’re up there you have a million gauges and controls meant to provide the operator the tools they need for any situation they might encounter and to interface with a galaxy of stuff that can be hooked up to the back. You need a special license which encapsulates this different paradigm of use, operating a gigantic vehicle under much different and more variable conditions than the everyday driver (in addition to approaching normal road conditions and functions like turning left with a different outlook and awareness).

It’s why I often tell people not to switch to Linux. It’s not for them.

1
hendrik
palaver.p3x.de
hendrik@palaver.p3x.de
Joined: 2021-08-21
#8 Posted: · edited   Subject: Re: The Unix way and integration complexity Quote Reply

Continuing the train of thought from the post: an approach that might serve you better is not a universal program that does everything. It is rather a custom program that does what you need. It very likely will apply reusable code, but in the form of modules instead of programs. It will be much easier to write well than to write a bash script well.

I mean that's basically the same thing, just a different user interface. I think from a technical perspective it doesn't matter a lot whether we write down the commands as text/words and connect them with "|" symbols or whether we pick them from a long list of symbols and arrange them as puzzle pieces or connect them with pipes or arrows drawn with the mouse.

2
Post Reply Page 1