Re: PROPOSAL: dot-proc interface [was: /proc stuff]

Linus Torvalds
2001-11-04T19:11:03Z

In article <20011104172742Z16629-26013+37@humbolt.nl.linux.org>,
Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net> wrote:
>On November 4, 2001 05:45 pm, Tim Jansen wrote:
>> > The dot-proc file is basically a binary encoding of Lisp (or XML), e.g. it
>> > is a list of elements, wherein an element can itself be a list (or a
>>
>> Why would anybody want a binary encoding?
>
>Because they have a computer?

That's a stupid argument.

The computer can parse anything.

It's us _humans_ that are limited at parsing. We like text interfaces,
because that's how we are brought up. We aren't good at binary, and
we're not good at non-linear, "structured" interfaces.

In contrast, a program can be taught to parse the ascii files quite
well, and does not have the inherent limitations we humans have. Sure,
it has _other_ limitations, but /proc being ASCII is sure as hell not
one of them.

In short: /proc is ASCII, and will so remain while I maintain a kernel.
Anything else is stupid.

Handling spaces and newlines is easy enough - see the patches from Al
Viro, for example.

Linus