Re: reiser4 (was Re: [PATCH] Revised extended attributesinterface)

[Hans Reiser <reiser@namesys.com>]

Extended attributes differ from files in N ways (forgive me for not 
specifying N exactly, it would distract us).

What I am saying is that each of the N permutations required to 
transform a file into an extended attribute should be separately 
selectable.  Theory guys would call this orthogonalizing the primitives. 
 (I am a theory guy.;-) ).

It is very important to decompose one's primitives into separately 
specifiable primitives.  It makes for a much more expressive abstract 
model.  This is a very standard policy among mathematicians, that they 
strive to decompose primitives into a more orthogonal toolkit because 
they know from hundreds of years of experience that it inevitably leads 
to more expressive power.  Let us learn from these mathematicians who 
are so much older and wiser than we.

Hans

curtis@integratus.com wrote:

>I know I'm stepping into a minefield, but I just can't help putting in
>my 2 pennies.  :-)
>
>Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
>
>>At 12:02 11/12/01, Hans Reiser wrote:
>>
>>>What would have happened if set theory had not just sets and elements, but
>>>sets, elements, extended-attributes, and streams, and you could not use
>>>the same operators on streams that you use on elements?  It would have
>>>been crap as a theoretical model.  It does real damage when you add things
>>>that require different operators to the set of primitives. Closure is
>>>extremely important to design.  Don't do this.
>>>
>>Since we are going into analogies: You don't use a hammer to affix a screw
>>and neither do you use a screwdriver to affix a nail...at least I don't. I
>>think you are trying to use a large sledge hammer to put together things
>>which do not fit together thus breaking them in the process. To use your
>>own words: Don't do this. (-; Each is distinct and should be treated as
>>such. </me ducks>
>>
>
>I agree with Anton.  Files have certain characteristics that we all
>know and love, stream-style attributes have pretty-much those same
>characteristics.  IMHO, we would like EAs to have a different set of
>characteristics so that the application programmer has different tools
>in her toolbox.  To continue the analogy: "if all you have is a hammer,
>everything looks like a nail".  Give someone that _already has_ a hammer
>a screwdriver and they will be confused for a while but will end up
>happier than if you gave them a "better hammer".
>
>Thanks,
>
>	Curtis
>